Livelihoods, Basic Services, Social Protection and Perceptions of the State in Conflict-affected Situations Household Survey 2013
Uganda, 2013
Get Microdata
Reference ID
UGA_2013_LBSP-W1_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS
Producer(s)
Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium, Feinstein International Center, Humanitarian Aid and Reconstruction, Food and Agriculture Organization
Collections
Metadata
Created on
Sep 09, 2020
Last modified
Nov 08, 2022
Page views
30783
Downloads
448
Identification
Survey ID Number
UGA_2013_LBSP-W1_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS
Title
Livelihoods, Basic Services, Social Protection and Perceptions of the State in Conflict-affected Situations Household Survey 2013
Country
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Uganda | UGA |
Study type
Other Household Survey [hh/oth]
Series Information
Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC) are implementing a cross-country panel survey (Livelihoods, Basic Services, Social Protection and Perceptions of the State in Conflict-affected Situations Household Survey) in five conflict-affected countries (DRC, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Uganda), with the aim of generating longitudinal quantitative data on people's livelihoods, their access to and experience of basic services, and their views of governance actors. This panel study tracks respondents from Uganda. The first round was implemented in 2012-2013. The second round will take place in 2015.
Abstract
This data is from the first round of a unique, cross-country panel survey conducted in Uganda by the Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC). The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) is the lead organisation of SLRC. SLRC partners who participated in the survey were: the Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA) in Sri Lanka, Feinstein International Center (FIC, Tufts University), the Sustainable Development Policy Institute(SDPI) in Pakistan, Humanitarian Aid and Reconstruction, based at Wageningen University (WUR) in the Netherlands, the Nepal Centre for Contemporary Research (NCCR), and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
This survey generated the first round of data on people's livelihoods, their access to and experience of basic services, and their views of governance actors. SLRC will attempt to re-interview the same respondents in 2015 to find out how the livelihoods and governance perceptions of people shift (or not) over time, and which factors may have contributed towards that change.
This survey generated the first round of data on people's livelihoods, their access to and experience of basic services, and their views of governance actors. SLRC will attempt to re-interview the same respondents in 2015 to find out how the livelihoods and governance perceptions of people shift (or not) over time, and which factors may have contributed towards that change.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
Households
Scope
Notes
-Basic pre-interview data: Information on location of the household, information on respondent and information on interview
-Information on the household: ethnicity, religion, displacement of household
-Basic individual information: Age, gender, marital status, education, school attendance of individuals within the household
-Livelihood sources and activities: Livelihood activities on individuals, migration, main income sources of households, livelihood barriers faced by households, credit
-Food security: food insecurity, who eats first, dietary diversity
-Assets: House and land ownership, usage of land, number of specific assets owned (tools, housing assets, livestock, transport)
-Shocks: experience of different shocks, coping strategies to deal with shocks
-Crimes: experience of different crimes coping strategies to deal with crimes
-Security: self-perceived safety
-Health: Access to and satisfaction with health services
-Education: Access to and satisfaction with education services
-Water: Access to and satisfaction with water services
-Social protection: Access to and satisfaction with social protection services
-Livelihood assistance: Access to and satisfaction with livelihood assistance
-Civil participation and grievance mechanisms: Knowledge of and usage of grievance mechanisms; problems with services; knowledge of and participation in civil participation opportunities
-Perceptions of government: Perception of local and central government (and informal governance actors for some countries)
-Information on the household: ethnicity, religion, displacement of household
-Basic individual information: Age, gender, marital status, education, school attendance of individuals within the household
-Livelihood sources and activities: Livelihood activities on individuals, migration, main income sources of households, livelihood barriers faced by households, credit
-Food security: food insecurity, who eats first, dietary diversity
-Assets: House and land ownership, usage of land, number of specific assets owned (tools, housing assets, livestock, transport)
-Shocks: experience of different shocks, coping strategies to deal with shocks
-Crimes: experience of different crimes coping strategies to deal with crimes
-Security: self-perceived safety
-Health: Access to and satisfaction with health services
-Education: Access to and satisfaction with education services
-Water: Access to and satisfaction with water services
-Social protection: Access to and satisfaction with social protection services
-Livelihood assistance: Access to and satisfaction with livelihood assistance
-Civil participation and grievance mechanisms: Knowledge of and usage of grievance mechanisms; problems with services; knowledge of and participation in civil participation opportunities
-Perceptions of government: Perception of local and central government (and informal governance actors for some countries)
Topics
| Topic | Vocabulary |
|---|---|
| Agriculture & Rural Development | FAO |
| Food (production, crisis) | FAO |
| Land (policy, resource management) | FAO |
| Safeguards | FAO |
| Access to Finance | FAO |
| Nutrition | FAO |
| Social protection | FAO |
| Infrastructure | FAO |
| Water | FAO |
| Fragile & Conflict-affected States | FAO |
| Community Driven Development | FAO |
Keywords
| Keyword |
|---|
| Livelihoods |
| Food security |
| Shocks |
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
Regional
Universe
Randomly selected households in purposely sampled sites (sampling procedure varied slightly by country). Within a selected household, only one household members was interviewed about the household. Respondents were adults and we aimed to interview a fairly even share of men/ women. In some countries this was achieved, but in other countries the share of male respondents is substantially higher (e.g. Pakistan).
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium | Overseas Development Institute |
| Feinstein International Center | Tufts University |
| Humanitarian Aid and Reconstruction | Wageningen University |
| Food and Agriculture Organization |
Producers
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| The Asia Foundation | Survey design |
| Food and Agriculture Organization | Survey design |
| Igarape Institute | Survey design |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name | Abbreviation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| UK Department for International Development | DFID | Funded the study |
| Irish Aid | Funded the study |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
The sampling strategy was designed to select households that are relevant to the main research questions and as well as being of national relevance, while also being able to produce statistically significant conclusions at the study and village level. To meet these objectives, purposive and random sampling were combined at different stages of the sampling strategy. The first stages of the sampling process involved purposive sampling, with random sampling only utilized in the last stage of the process. Sampling locations were selected purposely (including districts and locations within districts), and then randomly households were selected within these locations. A rigorous sample is geared towards meeting the objectives of the research. The samples are not representative for the case study countries and cannot be used to represent the case study countries as a whole, nor for the districts. The samples are representative at the village level, with the exception of Uganda.
Sampling locations (sub-regions or districts, sub-districts and villages) were purposively selected, using criteria, such as levels of service provision or levels of conflict, in order to locate the specific groups of interest and to select geographical locations that are relevant to the broader SLRC research areas and of policy relevance at the national level. For instance, locations experienced high/ low levels of conflict and locations with high/ low provision of services were selected and locations that accounted for all possible combinations of selection criteria were included. Survey locations with different characteristics were chose, so that we could explore the relevance of conflict affectedness, access to services and variations in geography and livelihoods on our outcome variables. Depending on the administrative structure of the country, this process involved selecting a succession of sampling locations (at increasingly lower administrative units).
The survey did not attempt to achieve representativeness at the country /or district level, but it aimed for representativeness at the sub-district /or village level through random sampling (Households were randomly selected within villages so that the results are representative and statistically significant at the village level and so that a varied sample was captured. Households were randomly selected using a number of different tools, depending on data availability, such as random selection from vote registers (Nepal), construction of household listings (DRC) and a quasi-random household process that involved walking in a random direction for a random number of minutes (Uganda).
The samples are statistically significant at the survey level and village level (in all countries) and at the district level in Sri Lanka and sub-region level in Uganda. The sample size was calculated with the aim to achieve statistical significance at the study and village level, and to accommodate the available budget, logistical limitations, and to account for possible attrition between 2012-2015. In a number of countries estimated population data had to be used, as recent population data were not available.
The minimum overall sample size required to achieve significance at the study level, given population and average household size across districts, was calculated using a basic sample size calculator at a 95% confidence level and confidence interval of 5. The sample size at the village level was again calculated at the using a 95% confidence level and confidence interval of 5. Finally, the sample was increased by 20% to account for possible attrition between 2012 and 2015, so that the sample size in 2015 is likely to be still statistically significant. The overall sample required to achieve the sampling objectives in selected districts in each country ranged from 1,259 to 3,175 households.
Sampling locations (sub-regions or districts, sub-districts and villages) were purposively selected, using criteria, such as levels of service provision or levels of conflict, in order to locate the specific groups of interest and to select geographical locations that are relevant to the broader SLRC research areas and of policy relevance at the national level. For instance, locations experienced high/ low levels of conflict and locations with high/ low provision of services were selected and locations that accounted for all possible combinations of selection criteria were included. Survey locations with different characteristics were chose, so that we could explore the relevance of conflict affectedness, access to services and variations in geography and livelihoods on our outcome variables. Depending on the administrative structure of the country, this process involved selecting a succession of sampling locations (at increasingly lower administrative units).
The survey did not attempt to achieve representativeness at the country /or district level, but it aimed for representativeness at the sub-district /or village level through random sampling (Households were randomly selected within villages so that the results are representative and statistically significant at the village level and so that a varied sample was captured. Households were randomly selected using a number of different tools, depending on data availability, such as random selection from vote registers (Nepal), construction of household listings (DRC) and a quasi-random household process that involved walking in a random direction for a random number of minutes (Uganda).
The samples are statistically significant at the survey level and village level (in all countries) and at the district level in Sri Lanka and sub-region level in Uganda. The sample size was calculated with the aim to achieve statistical significance at the study and village level, and to accommodate the available budget, logistical limitations, and to account for possible attrition between 2012-2015. In a number of countries estimated population data had to be used, as recent population data were not available.
The minimum overall sample size required to achieve significance at the study level, given population and average household size across districts, was calculated using a basic sample size calculator at a 95% confidence level and confidence interval of 5. The sample size at the village level was again calculated at the using a 95% confidence level and confidence interval of 5. Finally, the sample was increased by 20% to account for possible attrition between 2012 and 2015, so that the sample size in 2015 is likely to be still statistically significant. The overall sample required to achieve the sampling objectives in selected districts in each country ranged from 1,259 to 3,175 households.
Response Rate
The required sample sizes were achieved in all countries. Response rates were extremely high, ranging from 99%-100%.
Weighting
Different weights were used for study/district level and village level. Refer to the data in the World Bank Catalog (reference to this study).
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2013-01 | 2013-02 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Data Processing
Data Editing
CSPro was used for data entries in most countries.
Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing, including:
• Office editing and coding
• During data entry
• Structure checking and completeness
• Extensive secondary editing conducted by ODI
Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing, including:
• Office editing and coding
• During data entry
• Structure checking and completeness
• Extensive secondary editing conducted by ODI
Other Processing
Data entry was conducted by partners upon return from the field. In most cases CSPro was used to conduct data entry.
Data Appraisal
Estimates of Sampling Error
No further estimations of sampling error was conducted beyond the sampling design stage.
Data Appraisal
Done on an ad hoc basis for some countries, but not consistently across all surveys and domains.
Access policy
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | URL | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium | Overseas Development Institute | [email protected] | www.securelivelihoods.org |
Confidentiality
See https://microdata.worldbank.org/index.php/terms-of-use
Access conditions
Micro datasets disseminated by FAO shall only be allowed for research and statistical purposes. Any user which requests access working for a commercial company will not be granted access to any micro dataset regardless of their specified purpose. Users requesting access to any datasets must agree to the following minimal conditions:
- The micro dataset will only be used for statistical and/or research purposes;
- Any results derived from the micro dataset will be used solely for reporting aggregated information, and not for any specific individual entities or data subjects;
- The users shall not take any action with the purpose of identifying any individual entity (i.e. person, household, enterprise, etc.) in the micro dataset(s). If such a disclosure is made inadvertently, no use will be made of the information, and it will be reported immediately to FAO;
- The micro dataset cannot be re-disseminated by users or shared with anyone other than the individuals that are granted access to the micro dataset by FAO.
- The micro dataset will only be used for statistical and/or research purposes;
- Any results derived from the micro dataset will be used solely for reporting aggregated information, and not for any specific individual entities or data subjects;
- The users shall not take any action with the purpose of identifying any individual entity (i.e. person, household, enterprise, etc.) in the micro dataset(s). If such a disclosure is made inadvertently, no use will be made of the information, and it will be reported immediately to FAO;
- The micro dataset cannot be re-disseminated by users or shared with anyone other than the individuals that are granted access to the micro dataset by FAO.
Citation requirements
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the Identification of the Primary Investigator
- the title of the survey (including country, acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download
Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC) - SLRC survey - Round 1 - COUNTRY NAME. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date]
- the Identification of the Primary Investigator
- the title of the survey (including country, acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download
Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC) - SLRC survey - Round 1 - COUNTRY NAME. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date]
Disclaimer and copyrights
Disclaimer
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI_UGA_2013_LBSP-W1_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS_FAO
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Chief Statistician | OCS | Food and Agriculture Organization | Adoption of metadata for FAM |
| Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium | SLRC | Overseas Development Institute | Documentation of the DDI |
DDI Document version
UGA_2013_LBSP-W1_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS_v01