IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/900.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Challenges in predicting poverty trends using survey to survey imputation. Experiences from Malawi

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Poverty in low-income countries is usually measured with large and infrequent household surveys. A challenge is to find methods to measure poverty more frequently. The objective of this study is to test a method for predicting poverty, based upon a statistical model utilizing consumption surveys and light annual surveys. A decade of poverty predictions and regular poverty estimates in Malawi provides us with a unique real-life experience to better understand the suitability of such approaches to monitor trends in poverty. The analysis from Malawi suggests that a modelling approach works per se, given that information on the household’s demographic composition is included in the model. The main challenge when predicting onto other surveys seems to be related to comparability between the surveys. Differences in implementation, questionnaire design and survey sample size are aspects that may contribute to incomparability of data collected between the surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • Astrid Mathiassen & Bjørn K. Wold, 2019. "Challenges in predicting poverty trends using survey to survey imputation. Experiences from Malawi," Discussion Papers 900, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/en/forskning/discussion-papers/_attachment/381727
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Talip Kilic & Thomas Pave Sohnesen, 2019. "Same Question But Different Answer: Experimental Evidence on Questionnaire Design's Impact on Poverty Measured by Proxies," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(1), pages 144-165, March.
    2. Channing Arndt & Karl Pauw & James Thurlow, 2016. "The Economy-wide Impacts and Risks of Malawi's Farm Input Subsidy Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 962-980.
    3. Chirwa, Ephraim & Dorward, Andrew, 2013. "Agricultural Input Subsidies: The Recent Malawi Experience," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199683529.
    4. Newhouse, D. & Shivakumaran, S. & Takamatsu, S. & Yoshida, N., 2014. "How survey-to-survey imputation can fail," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6961, The World Bank.
    5. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    6. Astrid Mathiassen, 2013. "Testing Prediction Performance of Poverty Models: Empirical Evidence from U ganda," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(1), pages 91-112, March.
    7. Ulrik Beck & Karl Pauw & Richard Mussa, 2015. "Methods matter: The sensitivity of Malawian poverty estimates to definitions,data, and assumptions," WIDER Working Paper Series 126, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Linh Vu & Bob Baulch, 2011. "Assessing Alternative Poverty Proxy Methods in Rural Vietnam," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(3), pages 339-367, September.
    9. Kilic,Talip & Whitney,Edward Matthew & Winters,Paul Conal & Kilic,Talip & Whitney,Edward Matthew & Winters,Paul Conal, 2013. "Decentralized beneficiary targeting in large-scale development programs : insights from the Malawi farm input subsidy program," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6713, The World Bank.
    10. Channing Arndt & Karl Pauw & James Thurlow, 2016. "The Economy-wide Impacts and Risks of Malawi's Farm Input Subsidy Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 962-980.
    11. Carr, Stephen, 2014. "The challenge of Africa’s nitrogen drought: Some indicators from the Malawian experience:," MaSSP policy notes 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mason, Nicole & Tembo, Solomon, 2015. "Do input Subsidies Reduce Poverty among Smallholder Farm Households? Panel Survey Evidence from Zambia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212233, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Raymond Boadi Frempong, 2023. "Do subsidies on seed and fertilizer lead to child labour? Evidence from Malawi," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(2), March.
    3. Fujimoto, Takefumi & Suzuki, Aya, 2021. "Do Fertilizer and Seed Subsidies Strengthen Farmers' Market Participation? the Impact of Tanzania NAIVS on Farmers' Purchase of Agricultural Inputs and Their Maize-Selling Activities," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315044, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Raffaello Cervigni & Pasquale Lucio Scandizzo, 2017. "The Ocean Economy in Mauritius," World Bank Publications - Reports 28562, The World Bank Group.
    5. Talip Kilic & Thomas Pave Sohnesen, 2019. "Same Question But Different Answer: Experimental Evidence on Questionnaire Design's Impact on Poverty Measured by Proxies," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(1), pages 144-165, March.
    6. Ligon, Ethan & Christiaensen, Luc & Sohnesen, Thomas P, 2020. "Should Consumption Sub-Aggregates be Used to Measure Poverty?," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9b9929jh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    7. Mason, Nicole M. & Wineman, Ayala & Kirimi, Lilian & Mather, David, 2016. "The Effects of Kenya’s ‘Smarter’ Input Subsidy Program on Smallholder Behavior and Incomes: Do Different Quasi-Experimental Approaches Lead to the Same Conclusions?," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 232090, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    8. Martin Mwale & Dieter von Fintel & Anja Smith, 2022. "School drop out and farm input subsidies: gender and kinship heterogeneity in Malawi," Working Papers 01/2022, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    9. Makaiko G. Khonje & Christone Nyondo & Lemekezani Chilora & Julius H. Mangisoni & Jacob Ricker‐Gilbert & William J. Burke, 2022. "Exploring adoption effects of subsidies and soil fertility management in Malawi," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 874-892, September.
    10. Tony Addison, 2015. "Thirty years in Africa's development: From structural adjustment to structural transformation?," WIDER Working Paper Series 119, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Lunduka, Rodney & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Shively, Gerald & Jayne, Thom, 2014. "Understanding and Improving FISP Targeting," Food Security Collaborative Policy Briefs 234943, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    12. Benfica, Rui & Cunguara, Benedito & Thurlow, James, 2019. "Linking agricultural investments to growth and poverty: An economywide approach applied to Mozambique," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 91-100.
    13. Jose Cuesta & Gabriel Lara Ibarra, 2017. "Comparing Cross-Survey Micro Imputation and Macro Projection Techniques: Poverty in Post Revolution Tunisia," Journal of Income Distribution, Ad libros publications inc., vol. 25(1), pages 1-30, March.
    14. Harou, Aurélie P., 2018. "Unraveling the effect of targeted input subsidies on dietary diversity in household consumption and child nutrition: The case of Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 124-135.
    15. Basurto, Maria Pia & Dupas, Pascaline & Robinson, Jonathan, 2020. "Decentralization and efficiency of subsidy targeting: Evidence from chiefs in rural Malawi," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    16. David J. Hemming & Ephraim W. Chirwa & Andrew Dorward & Holly J. Ruffhead & Rachel Hill & Janice Osborn & Laurenz Langer & Luke Harman & Hiro Asaoka & Chris Coffey & Daniel Phillips, 2018. "Agricultural input subsidies for improving productivity, farm income, consumer welfare and wider growth in low‐ and lower‐middle‐income countries: a systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 1-153.
    17. Tony Addison, 2015. "Thirty years in Africa's development: From structural adjustment to structural transformation?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2015-119, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    18. Snapp, Sieg & Jayne, T.S. & Mhango, Wezi & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob, 2014. "Maize Yield Response to Nitrogen in Malawi’s Smallholder Production Systems," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 188570, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    19. Asfaw, Solomon & Cattaneo, Andrea & Pallante, Giacomo & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Improving the efficiency targeting of Malawi's farm input subsidy programme: Big pain, small gain?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 104-118.
    20. Jayne, Thomas S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, 2018. "Review: Taking stock of Africa’s second-generation agricultural input subsidy programs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-14.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Survey-to-survey imputation; poverty measurement; poverty model; household surveys; Malawi;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty

    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:ssb:dispap:900. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.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.