IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ldr/wpaper/283.html

Reweighting the OHS and GHS to improve data quality: representativeness, household counts, and small households

Author

Listed:
  • Amy Thornton

    (SALDRU and ACEIR, UCT)

  • Martin Wittenberg

    (School of Economics and DataFirst, UCT)

Abstract

The October Household Surveys (OHS) (1994-9) and the General Household Surveys (GHS) (2002-present) collected by StatsSA comprise South Africa's only nationally-representative time series with information on both people and households for (almost) every year of the post-apartheid period. However, the quality of these data has been compromised in three ways by how the survey weights have been calibrated. We document these problems and their implications in detail; and then use cross-entropy estimation to recalibrate the survey weights for a stacked version of these surveys between 1995 and 2011 to address these weaknesses. The first of these is that the weight calibration procedure breaks with sampling practise by calibrating person and household weights separately. This creates conceptual problems because the data is not properly representative of the population. It also creates statistical problems, including that a series of total population and household counts cannot be reliably extracted from the series, which is typically a first-order output for such a time series. Secondly, issues with the benchmarks StatsSA use mean the series of household counts extracted from the GHS is probably too low. Thirdly, no compensation is made by the survey weights for the chronic undersampling of small households over the entire period. Our new weights make headway in resolving these issues. Our weights yield consistent counts of people and households benchmarked on both person and household auxiliary information for the first time; and, benchmarked counts of one-, two-, and three-person households. Work is ongoing to improve the weights.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy Thornton & Martin Wittenberg, 2021. "Reweighting the OHS and GHS to improve data quality: representativeness, household counts, and small households," SALDRU Working Papers 283, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
  • Handle: RePEc:ldr:wpaper:283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.opensaldru.uct.ac.za/handle/11090/1011
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ldr:wpaper:283. 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: Alison Siljeur (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sauctza.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.