IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipe/ipetds/1832.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Distribuição de Renda nas Pesquisas Domiciliares Brasileiras: Harmonização e Comparação Entre Censos, PNADS e POFS

Author

Listed:
  • Pedro Herculano Guimarães Ferreira de Souza

Abstract

O objetivo deste trabalho é documentar e explicar as diferenças nas distribuições de renda dos censos demográficos, das Pesquisas Nacionais por Amostra de Domicílios (PNADs) e das Pesquisas de Orçamentos Familiares (POFs). A principal hipótese é que um número relativamente pequeno de procedimentos de harmonização, que aproxima o desenho das três pesquisas, é capaz de promover grande convergência dos resultados. Os resultados confirmam, em larga medida, esta hipótese: o retrato que emerge do Brasil nos censos, nas PNADs e nas POFs é coerente e robusto após a harmonização.Ainda que haja pequenas variações quanto aos níveis de renda, desigualdade e pobreza,pode-se afirmar que, pelo menos de acordo com os dados disponíveis até o momento,o crescimento da renda e a queda da desigualdade e da pobreza podem ser considerados fenômenos bem estabelecidos. Grande parte das discrepâncias entre censos, PNADs e POFs decorre de questões amostrais, conceituais e de tratamento que podem ser minimizadas com os procedimentos sugeridos. O desenho de cada pesquisa influencia fortemente seus resultados e, portanto, não se deve estranhar que os números produzidos não sejam diretamente comparáveis. This paper documents and tries to explain the discrepancies between the income distributions reported by the three major household surveys in Brazil: the Census, the Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios (PNAD) and the Pesquisa de Orçamentos Familiares (POF). The main hypothesis is that key differences in survey design are responsible for these results, which can be remedied by a relatively small number of harmonization procedures. Our analysis largely confirms this hypothesis: the harmonized data yields very consistent results in the Census, the PNAD and the POF. Although the levels of income, inequality and poverty are not exactly the same, the trends are very similar: income growth, the fall in inequality and poverty reduction in the past decade can be considered well-established facts. Most of the differences between the income data in the three surveys can be explained by disparities in sample design, conceptual framework and the statistical treatment of the data. Thus, it is not surprising that the three surveys report divergent figures, as they are not directly comparable.

Suggested Citation

  • Pedro Herculano Guimarães Ferreira de Souza, 2013. "A Distribuição de Renda nas Pesquisas Domiciliares Brasileiras: Harmonização e Comparação Entre Censos, PNADS e POFS," Discussion Papers 1832, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1832
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/TDs/td_1832.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ferreira Lima, Luis Cristovao, 2013. "A Persistente Desigualdade nas Grandes Cidades Brasileiras: o Caso de Brasília [The Persistent Inequality in the Great Brazilian Cities: The case of Brasília]," MPRA Paper 50936, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ferreira Lima, Luis Cristovao, 2013. "The Persistent Inequality in the Great Brazilian Cities: The Case of Brasília," MPRA Paper 50938, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1832. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Fabio Schiavinatto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipeaabr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.