Migration Household Survey 2010
Uganda, 2010
Get MicrodataIdentification
UGA_2010_MRHSS_v01_M
Migration Household Survey 2010
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Uganda | UGA |
Other Household Survey [hh/oth]
Sample survey data [ssd]
- Household
- Individual
Scope
The scope of the Migration Household Survey includes:
- Household Roster
- Housing Conditions
- Household Assets and Expenditure
- Household Use of Financial Services
- Internal and International Migration and Remittances from Former Household Members
- Internal and International Migration and Remittances from Non-Household Members
- Return Migrants
Coverage
Nationally representative sample
Producers and sponsors
| Name |
|---|
| Makerere Statistical Consult Limited |
| Name |
|---|
| Central Bank (Bank of Uganda) |
| Uganda Bureau of Statistics |
| Name |
|---|
| World Bank |
| Name |
|---|
| Survey Team including enumerators, team leaders, supervisors and coordinators |
| District and Local council leaders from the participating districts |
| All respondents |
Sampling
Sampling Frame
The 2002 population and housing census provided a frame for sample selection. The frame contains a list of all administrative units up to the lowest level called, 'Local Council 1', or LC1. This is usually, but not always consistent with a village in terms of area. The Enumeration Area (EA) may comprise of one village/LC1, or more than one village/LC1. The demarcation of EAs is based on total population within a given area and in many instances, may vary by locality. In addition the sampling frame also indicates the EA to which a particular LC belongs. The 2002 Uganda Sampling Frame has a total of 33,283 EAs.
Study population
The study population comprised of the entire population of Uganda. Based on the distribution of households in table 1 above, the sample was determined based on information from Uganda National Household survey 2005/06 conducted by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics. The proportion of internal migrants reported in the past 5 years has been used to estimate the required sample. Given the limited nature of the number of international migrants, the proportion of internal migrants is considered adequate to provide sufficient estimates of the indicators of interest.
Sample allocation by region
The above sample was proportionately allocated across the four statistical regions on the basis of the population in each of the regions. There was oversampling for urban population approximately by 5 times. To ease implementation, the regional sample was further disaggregated down to Enumeration Area level.
Selection of Enumeration Areas
The task was to undertake a nationally-representative survey of 2,000 households (urban and rural combined) in 2009 that would provide information on migration, remittances and their effects on development.
The frame was be divided into two strata namely rural and urban. A two-stage stratified sample design was adopted. The first stage representing the primary sampling unit comprised of the selection of EAs from each of the strata while at the second and ultimate stage households were selected. EAs were selected from the list of Enumeration Areas developed after the 2002 Population and Housing Census and updated to include new districts.
The selection of EAs was proportionally done based on the number of households in the respective stratum according to the 2006 Uganda household survey. All the EAs in each domain were sorted by county, sub-county and parish. A random number was generated and an appropriate random start and sampling interval was systematically selected from the ordered list with probability proportionate to number of households. This was done separately for urban and rural areas, hence stratified sampling. The proportion of EAs sampled in urban areas is about 5 times that in rural.
Selection of households
At the second stage, a complete listing of households in each EA was done to classify the households into three groups: non migrants, internal migrants and international migrants. The number of households per EA varied from around 20 to about 1000. Most of the time, all households were listed even in the large EAs since it was difficult to establish lines of demarcation to segment the EA.
A total of 10 households were selected randomly from each of the 200 EAs. The goal was to select 4 households with an international migrant (emigrant), 3 with one or more internal migrants, and 3 with no migrant. This sampling was done from the three strata or listings of households according to migration status. Separate sampling was done from each stratum using systematic sampling. In case of a refusal or other reason for non-response, another household was selected from the same stratum to reach the desired quota. In case the number of households listed in any of the three strata was smaller than the numbers desired (4, 3, 3), then all those listed in that stratum were automatically sampled and the short fall selected from the next stratum.
For example, if there were, say, 150 households in an EA, with 3 with international migrants, 27 with internal migrants, and 120 with no migrants, the numbers selected would be, respectively, 3, 3 and 3. But to make up 10, priority would be given to the migrant stratum to add one more, randomly selected, from that stratum. As another example, suppose there were 0 international migrant households; then 7 would be selected from the internal migrant stratum and still only 3 from the list of non-migrant households.
The choice of 10 households per EA was based on experience from the various economic surveys conducted by UBOS, where 10 households provide adequate representation at EA level for most of the economic and social indicators.
The listing operation
The survey targeted household with in-migrants or former members who have migrated away, whether to another part of the country (urban or rural) or to another country. Since the census frame does not uniquely identify who is a migrant or non migrant, and owing to the lack of an up to date list of all households in Uganda from which to draw the sample, the survey team adopted a listing exercise as stop gap measure.
The exercise involved conducting a fresh listing of all households in each of the selected EAs. During the exercise, households with migrants were identified and the migrants clearly categorized as internal-within Uganda- or international where household members had moved to another country all together. The total number of listed household numbers was 24,618. Thereafter, a sample of 10 households was selected using systematic sampling procedure.
Three categories of non response were encountered in the survey. These include:
· Household not Visisted: In this category, the survey teams were unable to visit the households due to one reason or another. This happened in Karamoja, where 2 EAs could not be visited due to insecurity; Kalangala, an island EA where residents were reported to have vacated the EA on the advice of the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) in a bid to conserve the environment, four years prior to the visit by the survey team and in Kampala, where an EA could not be located. This led to a loss of 40 responses.
· Incomplete Information: Here households were located but enumerators were not able to conduct or complete the interviews due to various reasons. Such reasons include respondents' hostility, interruption by an unforeseen event such as death of the respondent's close relative. The total number of responses lost in this category is 79.
Overall, there were 1872 valid responses received representing a response rate of 94%. Of these, 49% reported having migrants.
The first stage comprised of total number of households in the listed EAs and the total number of households in the entire frame. The total number of households was used as the measure of size.
At the second stage, the total number of households listed was used to select the sample of 10 as described above. This fraction constituted the second stage weights.
The product of these two weights, with the appropriate sampling fraction, yielded the final EA/household weights used. (Note that the reciprocal of the weight).
Survey instrument
The questionnaire consisted of seven sections namely:
A Cover Sheet requiring household identification particulars including district name and code, county name and code, parish name and code, EA name, stratum, household number, names of the household head and first spouse, number of household members and a description of the location of the household.
In addition, the page captured details of the interview including the interviewer name, date, duration and the outcome of the interview. It also provided for the team leaders remarks and signature.
Section 1: Household roster
This section captured the socio-demographic characteristics of all household members.
Section 2: Households housing conditions
In this section, information was sought on the type of dwelling, occupancy status, the physical characteristics of the dwelling, and access to basic utilities including water, electricity and sanitation.
Section 3 Household Assets and Expenditure
The section collected information on the assets and expenditures of the household. This information was used to determine the welfare status of the household.
Section 4: Household Use of Financial Services:
In this section, information relating to use of financial services by household members was collected.
Section 5: Internal and International Migration And Remittances From Former Household Members
This section captured information on migration, both internal and international as well as remittances received by the household from former household member migrants.
Section 6: Internal and International Migration and Remittances From Former Household Members
Like section 5 above, section 6 sought information on migration, both internal and international as well as remittances received by the household from non household member migrants.
Section 7: Return Migrants
Here information on Return migrants was captured. A return migrant was defined as an adult member (over 18 years old) currently living in the household, who had lived in another country or another place in Uganda for at least 3 months in the 5 years preceding the survey. The information sought in this section related to the last migration episode for each return migrant.
Data collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2010-02 | 2010-05 |
Primary supervision was done by a team leader who was responsible for making contact with and introducing the four team mates to the local authorities; overseeing the listing exercise, selecting the sample. Team leaders also had to crosscheck entries every evening before signing off the completed questionnaires and moving on to the next EA.
Supervisors were appointed one for each region i.e. East, South, North, West, South West and Central. Supervisors cross checked the team’s submissions and also provided technical guidance where necessary.
The four coordinators were responsible for protocol and higher level intervention.
A total of ten teams comprising of a team leader and four members were constituted to conduct field work activities. The teams were assigned respective areas of operation and named after the main language used in their area of operation.
Teams Luganda I, II, II and IV covered the Central and Southern regions. The Luo and Lugbara teams covered the Northern region, while Ateso and Lusoga teams covered the Eastern region. The Western and South west were covered by Runyankole and Rutooro teams respectively.
Each team covered a total of 20 EAs on average.
Teams were provided with Letters of Introduction addressed to leaders in the selected districts and LCs explaining the purpose of the survey and seeking their cooperation in the exercise.
Each team was also provided with transports funds computed according to mileage to be covered, maps of the respective EAs allocated to them and identity cards.
Each member was issued with a contract letter spelling out the terms and conditions of the exercise. They also had to swear an oath of secrecy as a means of ensuring confidentiality of the data.
The survey was implemented in two phases between February and May 2010.
Data processing
Data Editing: Data editing was initially done by six editors from among the enumerators.
Prior to data entry, efforts were made to manually edit and ensure that inconsistent entries in the questionnaire were corrected.
Data entry was initially done using the EPIDATA software after which it was exported to SPSS for further processing and analysis. This included the creation of variable and value labels for the data.
Data Access
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the Identification of the Primary Investigator
- the title of the survey (including acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download
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.
Metadata production
DDI_UGA_2010_MRHSS_v01_M
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| World Bank, Development Economics Data Group | Generation of DDI documentation |
2011-02-15
Metadata version
Version 1.0 (February 2011). Most of study descriptions information is not available. Survey data files, questionnaire and interviewer manual are uploaded.