This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The comparability of Census 1996, Census 2001 and Community Survey 2007

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Derek Yu () (Department of Economics, University of Stellenbosch)
Abstract

Census 1996 and Census 2001 are the only all-inclusive censuses conducted by Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) under the new democratic dispensation, providing information on demographics, educational attainment, migration status, labour market status, economic activities, income, housing, and access to household goods and services. However, when the cabinet took a decision that a census would not be conducted in 2006, a gap in information between Census 2001 and the next Census, which is scheduled to take place in 2011, was created. Later, a decision was taken to conduct the Community Survey (CS) in 2007, which was designed to provide information similar to the two censuses. The aim of this paper is to look at the trends in demographics, educational attainment, labour market status, income and non-income welfare (e.g., housing, access to household goods and services) across the three surveys, using the 10% samples from the 1996 and 2001 censuses as well as the data from the Community Survey 2007. With regard to changes in income welfare, the household income variable was derived differently in each survey. Besides, all three surveys had high proportion of households with zero or unspecified household income, and excluding these households from poverty and inequality analyses would lead to biased results. Hence, sequential regression multiple imputation (SRMI) was applied at both person and household levels to impute values for the households with zero and unspecified income, before the imputed household income values were used to derive per capita income for analyzing poverty and inequality trends across the three surveys. Finally, income welfare and non-income welfare were compared by dividing households into per capita income quintiles.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.ekon.sun.ac.za/wpapers/2009/wp212009/wp-21-2009.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: First version, 2009
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 21/2009.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:sza:wpaper:wpapers94

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Private Bag X1, 7602 Matieland
Phone: 021-8082247
Fax: +27 (0)21-808 2409
Email:
Web page: http://www.ekon.sun.ac.za
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Melt van Schoor).

Related research
Keywords: South Africa; Household survey; poverty; inequality; missing data; imputation;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
J00 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - General

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The most prolific authors have over 700 items listed on IDEAS.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-28.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.