Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Towards consistency in child labour measurement: Assessing the comparability of estimates generated by different survey instruments

Contents:

Author Info

  • L. Guarcello
  • I. Kovrova
  • S. Lyon
  • M. Manacorda
  • F. C. Rosati

Abstract

The study addresses the comparability of child labour estimates produced by different common household survey instruments. This question has important implications for credibility of published estimates of child labour, and for the reliability of current survey instruments as tools for monitoring and guiding efforts towards the progressive elimination of child labour. The study, covering some 87 datasets for 35 countries, first confirms that estimates of child labour vary significantly across different kinds of surveys. The variation, moreover, appears to be substantially larger than that relative to other children’s activities like schooling. The study then addresses whether the observed significant differences in estimates are due to difference in population characteristics or to other features of the surveys. In other words, whether different populations are targeted by the various surveys, or whether they address the same (or very similar) population with different instruments. The empirical results indicate that it is the latter explanation, i.e., differences in survey features are most relevant. Differences in observable survey characteristics such as questionnaire type and fieldwork season explain some of the variation in child labour estimates across survey instruments, but a larger part of the variation stems from unobservable survey characteristics. Elements of the survey process not spelled out in the survey documentation, such as interview methods, the familiarity of interviewers with child labour concepts, the accuracy of data coding and processing, are all likely to be important in this context.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.ucw-project.org/Pages/bib_details.aspx?id=12245
File Function: full text
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Understanding Children's Work (UCW Programme) in its series UCW Working Paper with number 54.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Jun 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ucw:worpap:54

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Via Panisperna 28, 00184 Rome, Italy
Phone: +39 06 4341 2008
Fax: +39 06 6792 197
Email:
Web page: http://www.ucw-project.org
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Dillon, Andrew & Bardasi, Elena & Beegle, Kathleen & Serneels, Pieter, 2012. "Explaining variation in child labor statistics," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 136-147.
  2. Dammert, Ana C. & Galdo, Jose, 2013. "Child Labor Variation by Type of Respondent: Evidence from a Large-Scale Study," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 207-220.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucw:worpap:54. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gabriella Breglia).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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