SPC_PNG_1982_HHTRANSFERS_v01_M_v01_A_PUF
Interhousehold Transfers in Urban Papua New Guinea 1982
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Papua New Guinea | PNG |
Other Household Survey [hh/oth]
The 1982–83 study reported here is one of only a handful of studies primarily designed to quantify interhousehold transfers in urban Papua New Guinea. The main alternative sources of quantitative information on transfers are the four large-scale Household Income and Expenditure Surveys (HIES) conducted in 1975–76, 1987–88, 1996 and 2009–10.
The 1982–83 study reported here is one of only a handful of studies primarily designed to quantify interhousehold transfers in urban Papua New Guinea. The main alternative sources of quantitative information on transfers are the four large-scale household income and expenditure surveys conducted in 1975–76, 1987–88, 1996 and 2009–10 (see Bureau of Statistics, 1977; Gibson, 1998; World Bank, 2000; and National Statistical Office, n.d.).
This study can be set alongside the large-scale household income and expenditure surveys to provide more fine-grained information on how and why transfers flow and their impact on consumption and poverty. The relevance of the study today is not the kina value of transfers, but the description of transfers and the relationships between transfers and other household and community characteristics.
The study adds to what is known from the large-scale household income and expenditure surveys by focussing on four low-income census units (three settlements and one traditional village in two urban areas) and by including some of the poorest urban households. The field methods were designed to capture transfers in more detail than larger surveys could. Unlike other surveys, the study included meals given and received and overnight hospitality in the definition of transfers. The study also recorded for the donor or recipient of every transfer the relationship to the study household, the birthplace, and place of residence.
The main data collection methods were demographic and economic surveys of all 415 households (2,548 residents) in the four low-income study areas, and two-week income and consumption surveys of a sample of 48 households (295 residents) within those areas.
Although initial findings from the study were issued at the time (Morauta, 1983a and 1984a), the full data and analysis were not published. The purpose of this report is to place a fuller set of data, including data by household for all consumption survey sample households, and a more complete analysis in the public domain.
The analysis of the data in this report mainly follows the original design. However, in two areas, the definition of adequate calorie and protein consumption and the development of poverty lines, the analysis draws on studies since the 1980s, particularly the World Bank poverty assessments (World Bank 2000 and 2004) and the work of Gibson (1998, 2000, 2012, and Gibson et al., 2010).
Sample survey data [ssd]
Household.
Version 01: Cleaned, labelled and anonymized version of the Master file.
2023-04-26
Data was extracted from the Development Policy Centre Website (https://devpolicy.org/publications/interhousehold-transfers-in-png-a-study-from-the-1980s-2023/).
All 6 tables were merged into 1 single dataset at household level.
-HOUSEHOLD: Economic activity; Education; Income; Subsistence; Consumption; Cash income.
Five urban locations:
-In Port Moresby: Nine Mile, Gordons Ridge, Gerehu
-In Madang: Biliau and Wagol.
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Louise Morauta | Papua New Guinea Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research |
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| John Kambu | Papua New Guinea Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research |
| Linda Newell | Papua New Guinea Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research |
| Lazarus Masavi | Papua New Guinea Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research |
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| International Development Research Centre of Canada | Funding |
| Papua New Guinea Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research | Funding |
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| Government of Papua New Guinea | Computing support |
| Papua New Guinea National Statistical Office | Technical support |
| Development Policy Centre, Australia National University | Peer comment and publication |
SELECTION OF STUDY CENSUS UNITS
Analysis of the 1980 census: The locations of urban citizen households without wage-earners in all urban areas were identified through special tabulations prepared by the National Census Office (NCO). These tabulations identified the location of 56,912 households according to the number of wage-earners in each household and the census unit (the smallest locational grouping in the census).
Based on the 1980 census information on the location of households without wage-earners, four census units were selected for the study, where there was a high incidence of households without wage-earners. This was to ensure that the study captured some of the poorest urban households. In this report these four census units are referred to as the low-income areas, or low-income census units. A single high-income census unit was also selected for comparison.
HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS
The household surveys were designed to provide an up-to-date social and economic description of the selected census units through single interviews with every household. The survey was also designed to provide the frame for sample selection for the consumption surveys.
All 415 households were surveyed in the low-income census units, 100 in Nine Mile, 207 in Gordons Ridge, 65 in Biliau and 43 in Wagol. There was no nonresponse in these census units. In addition, 26 out of the 29 citizen households in the Gerehu census unit were surveyed (with three citizen Gerehu households declining to participate).
CONSUMPTION SURVEYS
Selection of consumption survey sample: Using information from the household surveys, a sample of 48 households was selected across the four low-income census units for the consumption surveys. Two strata of equal size were selected in each census unit, households with and without wage-earners. A further sample of 11 households was selected from the high-income census unit. The 59 households are those presented in this documentation.
One aim in selecting the consumption survey sample in the four low-income census units was to ensure that poor households within each census unit were included. For this reason, the sample was stratified by whether households had wage-earners. There were six sample households with wage-earners and six households without wage-earners in each census unit, giving a total of 48 households in the four low-income census units.
The second aim was to select each sample of six in each low-income census unit to be as representative as possible of the characteristics of the group of households either with or without wage-earners from which it came in the census unit as determined from the household surveys with respect to:
• province of birth;
• age of household head;
• sex of household head;
• whether the household contained female residents;
• the main source of cash income; and
• for households with wage-earners only, the number and education level of wage-earners.
For each stratum in each low-income census unit, a desired profile was constructed for the six sample households and the households which were the best fit to the profile were identified. Where there was a choice of households fitting the profile, preference was given on the basis of location within the census unit (to make it easier to walk around the sample households in one session) and the language spoken (households where the team did not require an interpreter). Broadly speaking, the profiles were achieved.
In the high covenant census unit, there was no stratification by wage-earner status of households. Otherwise, the variables above were used in the same way as for low-income census units to select the sample. One sample household declined to continue to participate in the consumption survey after commencement, and the
sample was reduced to 11 at that point.
The distinction in the sample selection process between households with wageearners and households without wage-earners did not work out quite as planned. Three households selected as having a wage-earner did not have any income from employment in the two weeks of the consumption surveys and one household had
only low income from casual work. This was a consequence of the instability of low-paid work in these areas. Four people lost their jobs between the household surveys and the commencement of the consumption surveys. To maintain the sampling structure, no adjustment was made for this loss of jobs. There was no comparable problem in the sample of households without wage-earners. They all remained without formal employment during the consumption survey periods.
While sampling weights were calculated for the consumption survey and included in the full report of the study, the data presented here on the 79 households is unweighted.
For the consumption surveys, the design drew heavily on the Household Expenditure Survey (HES). The main differences were in the detailed questions on transfers and the attention to subsistence produce.
The questionnaires are available for download from this website and contain the following thematic modules:
-Individual characteristics;
-Visits to and from other households;
-Meals given and received;
-Income;
-Types of income;
-Transfers;
-Food consumption;
-Calorie consumption;
-Protein consumption;
-Consumption;
-Poverty.
| Start | End | Cycle |
|---|---|---|
| 1982-11-02 | 1983-08-03 | Data collection |
| Start date | End date | Cycle |
|---|---|---|
| 1982-11-02 | 1982-11-15 | Nine Mile collection |
| 1983-03-08 | 1983-03-21 | Gordons Ridge collection |
| 1983-05-17 | 1983-06-21 | Gerehu collection |
| 1983-06-30 | 1983-07-13 | Biliau collection |
| 1983-07-21 | 1983-08-03 | Wagol collection |
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Louise Morauta and John Kambu | Papua New Guinea Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research |
Detailed diary-based income and consumption surveys (called the consumption surveys in this report) were undertaken over two weeks in the sample of 48 households in the four low-income census units and in the 11 households in the high-income census unit. These are the source of the data in this collection.
The field work team lived on site in two of the census units and visited for several hours a day in the other three. Most commonly, the language used was Pidgin, but English was used in the high-income census unit in Gerehu and the Toaripi language (spoken in the Malalaua District of the Gulf Province) was used in Nine Mile, one of the low-income census units. Field assistants were employed from each low-income census unit and helped if language problems arose.
The centrepiece of the project were the two-week consumption surveys conducted with the 48 sample households in the low-income study areas and with the 11 sample households in the high-income area. The consumption surveys occupied the largest part of the field work, since they involved daily visits by the team in the
late afternoon or early evening to all sample households at each site over 15 days.
The field team carried scales and weighed any food items or betel nut that were not prepacked and therefore needed weighing to price. The weighing was particularly important for subsistence produce, and transfers in kind both inwards and outwards. Information on a daily basis was collected on income in cash and kind, inwards and outwards transfers in cash and kind, subsistence production, cash expenditure and inwards and outwards overnight visits and meals given and received. The purpose of the in-person approach was to enable detailed questioning and measurement on site each day. In a one-off recall interview with each sample household, information was gathered on irregular transfers and items purchased over longer periods.
The design of the consumption surveys drew heavily on the 1975/76 Household Expenditure Survey (HES). The main differences were in the detailed questions on transfers and the attention to subsistence produce. For every transfer, the relationship between the recipient or donor and the study household was recorded, and the place of residence and place of birth of the recipient or donor. For visits to the household and visits of household members to other households, the same information was also recorded along with information on how many meals were eaten. Check lists were used to ensure coverage of what had happened during the day. All data were recorded by the field team. There was no requirement for households to keep their own records, although where any notes or receipts were kept these were helpful.
The process was onerous for households, but they held up well under the workload. There were no dropouts during the consumption surveys apart from the one household in Gerehu already mentioned. At the end of the study each household was offered a choice of consumer items or bags of rice as an acknowledgement of their effort.
For each census unit, surveys of local prices, including local store and market prices, were made to enable values to be attached to subsistence produce and transfers in kind. These supplemented items that were priced in the official Consumer Price Index (CPI) surveys for Port Moresby and Madang at relevant dates. For each location, 42 standard food items were priced, of which between 29 and 31 were priced using CPI data and the balance were priced from study surveys. Pricing surveys for the two Madang census units were conducted only once because field work was conducted in a single block of time. Pricing surveys for Nine Mile and Gordons Ridge were undertaken at different times to coincide with the field work in those areas. Prices were also calculated for standard transfers such as one cup of sugar and one small dish of uncooked rice as well as non-food items in common use, particularly firewood and betel nut.
Where variables are given in kina values, these are expressed in local prices at the time of the study.
Initial transaction records were analysed in 1982 and 1983 using SPSS to produce data by household. Data by household was edited in 2022 using Excel.
There are two gaps in the data set.
Further information on the construction of the variables in the data set can be found in Appendix II of the full study report which is available for download on this site.
| Name | URL |
|---|---|
| Australia National University | https://www.anu.edu.au/ |
Public use files, accessible to all.There are no conditions or reporting requirements placed on access.
"Morauta. L. 2023, Interhousehold Transfers in urban PNG 1982/83 (HHTRANSFER 1982), Version 01 of the public-use dataset (April 2023), provided by the Pacific Data Hub - Microdata Library. https://microdata.pacificdata.org/index.php/home"
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.
| Name | URL |
|---|---|
| Australia national university | https://www.anu.edu.au/ |
DDI_SPC_PNG_1982_HHTRANSFERS_v01_M_v01_A_PUF
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Statistics for Development Division | Pacific Community (SPC) | Documentation of the study |
2023-04-26
-Version 01 (April 2023): This is the first attempt at documenting the 1982/83 Interhousehold Transfers in Urban Papua New Guinea. Done by Statistics for Development Division at Noumea.