research in support of the draft guidelines on food data...

23
John Gibson University of Waikato United Nations Statistical Commission: March 7, 2017 Research in support of the draft guidelines on food data collection in household surveys for low- and middle-income countries

Upload: lytram

Post on 19-Aug-2018

238 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

John GibsonUniversity of Waikato

United Nations Statistical Commission: March 7, 2017

Research in support of the draft guidelines on food data collection in household surveys for low- and middle-income countries

Why are new guidelines needed?

2

} Informed by recent evidence over the last decade from survey experiments in low-income countries

} previous recommendations often based on evidence from rich countries whose findings did not necessarily apply¨ E.g. diary surveys work poorly when under-resourced

} Rising affluence in low- and middle-income countries creates new challenges for surveying food consumption

} Designs appropriate for “common pot” meals prepared mostly from self-produced or bought ingredients are poorly suited to rapidly urbanizing settings with individualized eating by people who know nothing of the ingredients

} Good statistical systems find a way to deal with the tension of adapting to what now works best while not sacrificing comparability with what was done in the past

Summary of the main draft guidelines

3

} In low-income countries a food recall with 7-day period best balances cost and accuracy

} Uncertainty about whether recall should be bounded

} Either stagger sample over 12 months or have multiple visits per household, rather than field in only few months

} Both can deal with seasonality but revisits also allow for a possible method of controlling for excess variability

} All modes of food acquisition should be covered} Focus on food intended for consumption

If survey is not for a CPI or NAS, a food list of ca. 100 items may suffice

False economy from shorter lists which often save little time

Summary continued

4

} Consider including a meal participation roster} Little is known about competing options here} Interacts with recommendations on Food Away From Home

since a meal roster not only gets incoming guests, but also the meals that residents eat elsewhere

} Food Away From Home needs much more attention} A single question at the household-level is insufficient} Distinguish food prepared at home and consumed outside

from food prepared outside and consumed at home} Unit for FAFH data collection should be individuals not

households since household respondent often unaware of how “walking around money” is spent by their co-residents

Very important initiative

5

} Missed a chance in 2006 to harmonize/improve survey practice because UN Handbook on Poverty Statistics which included metadata survey of statistics offices stalled

} Much of the discrepancy in poverty measurement over time and space is based on gaps in the surveys

} Arguably missed chances with earlier LSMS to learn more about survey methods

} E.g. bounded recall talked about for decades but still little firm evidence for whether it is worth it

} Lots of what we now know for low-income countries is from a few experiments in Tanzania, Bangladesh etc so the widening of the evidence base may be one of the most valuable outcomes of this initiative

A missed opportunity in 2006…

6

An opportune time to revise survey practices…

7

} Confluence of institutional support and interest} Business-as-usual unlikely to be successful

} Measurement task gets harder, not easier, with rising affluence

} Inequality and variance increasingly matters, so the income elastic parts of the diet come more into play¨ Existing methods are maybe OK for staple ingredients but do

badly for elastic items and outside of ‘common pot’ environs¨ Ingredients approach increasingly misses how food is consumed

} Data errors become more important as we focus on the distribution amongst the poor and hungry

} People are less compliant and harder to survey

Surveys  Less  Informative  About  Poverty  and  Hunger  Than  is  Often  Realized

} Poverty  and  hunger  estimates  are  inconsistent  across  countries  and  over  time} Unlike  for  macro,  no  general  adherence  to  SNA/BoP manual} unlike  for  fertility  and  MCH  there  is  no  central  agency  to  dictate  survey  design  everywhere

} Matters  especially  for  countries  with  weak  and  under-­‐resourced  statistical  systems,  since  they  are  more  likely  to  change  from  one  design  to  another,  donor-­‐driven

} More  surveys  doesn’t  mean  better  understanding  if  the  additional  surveys  are  poorly-­‐suited  to  the  capacity  of  the  country

Comparisons  of  Poverty  and  Inequality  are  Fragile(random  assignment  to  different  survey  methods  in  TZ,  Beegle et  al  JDE,  2012)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Long  list,  14  day

Long  list,  7day

Subset  list,  7day

Collapsed  list,  7day

Usual  month

Diary,  HH  freq

Diary,  HH  infreq

Individual  Diary

Poverty  Gap  IndexGini  Index

Apparent  Hunger  Prevalence  as  Survey  Method  Varies(Tanzania  experiment,  EDCC  De  Weerdt et  al,  2016)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Long  list,  14  day

Long  list,  7day

Subset  list,  7day

Usual  month

Diary,  HH  freq

Diary,  HH  infreq

Individual  Diary

Our  Traditional  Food  Survey  Emphasis  is  Misplaced

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Share  of  To

tal  Foo

d  Expe

nditu

re

Urban  China

Eating  Out/Total  Food

Grain/Total  Food

Feature of the new evidence is that it provides evidence on resource implications

} Survey experiments are always limited since we do not know the true consumption level} Plausible benchmarks can be provided by intensive

monitoring that is impractical in typical settings} Also from statistical frameworks, such as Benford’s Law

} Exercises using both types of framework suggest that some survey resources are misallocated} Revisiting every 2-3 days over a month, or using a

diary, doesn’t necessarily give more accurate data but costs much more

Resource requirements for diary surveys

• personal diary with frequent (daily or 2-daily) supervision cost 6-10x as much as recall

è Better data, but at a price

• Household diary is 4-7x as much, and does poorly in urban areas and when more adults in the household (“walking around money”)

• diary surveys can degrade to recall, when interviewers deal with uncooperative recorders introducing non-comparability

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Recall (numeraire)

Household diary - infrequent

Household diary - frequent

Personal diary -frequent

Minimum costs (US$/hh) in Tanzania experiment

Diary fatigue leads to wasted surveys

} Example from Papua New Guinea diary-keeping HIES that cost $15m, with live-in enumerators 3 weeks per village} The PNG CPI is only priced in, and applies to, a handful of urban

areas but the survey was carried out nationally

} Number of transactions in diaries declined by 3.4% per day} Total value of consumption transactions declined by 4.4% per day

of diary keeping periodè can’t distinguish the poor from those who got fed up

Fed up respondents mattered elsewhere too} Less cooperation measuring ending food stocks than starting ones,

with (apparent) destocking cutting 4%age points off poverty rateèHard to use this expensive survey to measure poverty14

Diary Fatigue: PNG HIES 2009-10

15

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Average  value  pe

r  transactio

n  (Kina)

Num

ber  ('000

s),  Sum

 of  log  value

 (K'000

s)

Diary-­‐Keeping  Day

Number  (LHS) Value  (LHS) Average  Value  (RHS)

Seasonality, revisits, and reference periods

16

} Many surveys will want longer reference periods than just one week (a ‘snapshot’ of usual diets)} At extreme, FAO PoU refers to one-year so some way of

extrapolating from one-week to one-year is needed that does not create excess variability in long-run welfare estimates

} The key is how highly correlated is the consumption of the same people in different periods of the year

} Limited evidence on this suggests that the correlations are quite low, » 0.5, and so revisiting the same household is informative

} è the consumption of the household is a moving target and going to great expense to capture it exactly in one snapshot is mistaken

} The burden on households and on budgets could be reduced by reallocating some adjacent interviews (e.g. with a diary survey) to, say, six months later

A snapshot (e.g. weekly) gives a bigger variance than for annual calories or annual consumption

0.00

0.01

0.01

0.02

0.02

0.03

0.03

0.04

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Den

sity

Daily calories (per capita)

Annual

Weekly

Energy  availabilityEnergy  requirement

Revisits allowed hunger in Myanmar to be split into chronic and transient parts

18

0

.0002

.0004

.0006

.0008

0 2000 4000 6000 8000Daily  Calories

Monthly  (or  naive  extrap) Annual  (corrected  extrap)

26% < 2000 cal/d

14% < 2000 cal/d

Length of the food recall list

19

} Multiple objectives of surveying food data especially matter to this design issue} For a measure of total household monetary welfare, a single

question on “all food spending” or “all groceries” proves surprisingly useful (e.g. in PSID in US)

} Partly because respondents may use estimation strategies (“rules of thumb”) rather than try to enumerate every instance} Surveys could be more explicit on whether the goal is to get

respondents to count/recall/list each occurrence, or instead to give an accurate rule-of-thumb estimate

} For diet diversity, fortification, cost-of-basic-needs food basket for poverty etc we need much more commodity detail, with items from all major groups and considering incidence errors (need prompting) versus value or volume errors

Respondent Time Requirements for recall

•little time saved by shortening the recall list by collapsing to major headings or using subsets•Asking about “usual” month, as was used in several LSMS, and was recommended to get a more typical measure of living standards, almost doubles the time

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Long list, 14 day

Long list, 7 day

Subset list, 7 day

Collapsed list, 7 day

Long list, usual

month

minutes to complete food recallin the Tanzania experiment

Draft guidelines are ambivalent on prices

21

} Treating prices as separate from household surveys is awkward as need them to properly measure food } Derive quantity from expenditure for non-quantified items} Cross-checking plausibility of reported values/quantities} Unit values are not prices but also have their own use

} As a measure of quality, where they matter to debates about how pricing policy can influence consumer behavior

} E.g. effect of the soda tax on soda demand in Mexico (and thus on possible future obesity) seems four-times larger if quality responses are ignored and unit values are used as a proxy for prices

} Prices become more important as consumers transition from own-production to market purchases} Without price data, quality of life (buying premium varieties) gets

confused with the cost of living and biases poverty profiles

Where to from here?

22

} The evidence base to support the guidelines can usefully grow further, particularly in low-income countries} Good collaboration of donors, researchers and statistics

offices is essential for improving this evidence} At the country level, if some of the guidelines are adopted it

may entail changes in survey design} Any change in method should have a controlled comparison

to ‘bridge’ old/new} Support for these bridging exercises might usefully come

from donors, since ‘old’ and ‘new’ surveys may not have the same funders supporting them and the bridging exercise may not fall into either survey’s budget frame

Thank You