Using Household Surveys to Measure International Migration and Remittances in Developing Countries: Examples and Methodological Issues

1
Using Household Surveys to Measure International
Migration and Remittances in Developing
Countries Examples and Methodological Issues

• Richard E. Bilsborrow
• University of North Carolina
• Presented at Expert Group Meeting on Measuring
  Migration, Remittances, and Development Using
  Household Surveys An Assessment of Efforts in
  Developing Countries, US Census Bureau,
• January 14-15, 2008.

2
Importance of international migration in the
world, demographically

• 191 million persons living in a country other
  than that of their birth in 2005, 3 of world
  population
• Compares with 75 million, 2.9 in 1960
• But much higher, 9.5, in more developed
  countries (MDCs) vs. 1.4 in less developed
  (LDCs)
• Above is lifetime data flow data show how rare
  it is
• UN data indicate annual in-migration rate during
  2000-2005 of 0.22 in MDCs and -0.05 in LDCs

3
Recent migration has increased but is still rare
compared to the sending or receiving country

• The only countries in the world with over 1
  million population in 2005 which had a net annual
  international migration rate over 1 in 2000-2005
  were
• Eritrea, Afghanistan, Kuwait, and United Arab
  Emiratespositive
• Liberia, Tajikistan, Georgia, and Omannegative
• All values 1-1.9 except UAE 5.0
• Only country with over 6.5 million pop is
  Afghanistan

4
International migration as a rare phenomenon
(continued)

• Developed countries with highest inflows were
  Spain and Ireland at 0.97 and 0.98
• Others of interest include Canada 0.7, Australia
  0.5, USA 0.4, Germany 0.3, UK 0.2, Netherlands
  0.2, France 0.1
• Albania -0.6, Ukraine -0.3, Armenia -0.7
• Iran -0.4 Morocco, Sudan -0.3 Philippines,
  Pakistan -0.2 Egypt -0.1
• Guatemala -0.5 Mexico, Ecuador, Nicaragua -0.4,
  Dom. Rep. -0.3 Peru -0.2
• Surprisingly few others in world (over 5 million
  population) over -0.1 (China, India -0.03)

5
Defining and Measuring Migrants

• Based on place (country) of birth foreign born
• Based on country of previous residence being
  different from current, and time of arrival
  (yields fixed-period migration, almost flow
  statistic)
• Based on citizenship
• Duration of residence (or intended residence) in
  current country and previous country (6, 12 mo.
  criteria)
• Sources Census, current population register,
  border/admission statistics, registers of
  foreigners/foreign workers, naturalization stats.

6
Purpose of data collection is it to

• Measure/count international migrantsimmigrants,
  emigrants, return migrants
• Over some fixed recent time period (cut-off of 1,
  2, 5, 10.years)
• Characterize migrants age, sex, education, work
  experience, assets.
• Collect data on remittances sent/received
• Study determinants of migration and/or
  consequences of migration

7
Two survey approaches

• Adapt existing surveywhich has major purpose (s)
  established, sample size and design,
  questionnaire content, stakeholders, periodicity
• Advantages main cost already covered,
  inexpensive to add a few questions
• Disadvantages cannot add many questions, sample
  of migrants may be inadequate
• OR
• Design and implement new specialized survey

8
Focus is on developing countries of emigration

• Data on individuals who have left (emigrated)
  from households can be obtained from household
  members remaining behind (proxy respondents)
• Limitations in data that can be obtained
• Data on whole households that emigrated usually
  only obtainable in country of destination,
  indicating major limitation of survey carried out
  only in origin country

9
Types of existing surveys to think of adapting

• Labour force surveys
• Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS)
• Living Standard Measurement Surveys (LSMS)
• Other (e.g., Multi-purpose) surveys
• Inherent limitations of border statistics,
  passenger statistics, admission statistics, so
  not discussed further

10
Adapting existing surveys to collect more/better
data on International Migrants

• Requirements of surveys large sample size and/or
  high prevalence of migrants in country
• Issue of rare elements, especially if focus is
  on recent migrants vs. lifetime migrants
• Example, survey of 10,000 households in country
  with 10 foreign born, 2 recent, yields only 500
  adult migrants
• Most useful are surveys which already have some
  relevant information, e.g., previous place of
  residence or birth, employment status, etc.
• The longer the questionnaire already in use, the
  more limited new questions can be in general

11
Labour force surveysthe best prospects

• Most universal across countries, regular
• Administered by National Statistics Office
• Relatively large sample sizes
• National coverage and representation
• Already collect some key data on international
  migrantsage, sex, education, employment,etc.
• Many ask place of birth, thus identifying foreign
  born, some also ask previous place of residence x
  years ago or when came to country

12
Labour force surveys (cont.)

• Some developing countries already include modules
  on international migration
• Examples include Pakistan, Costa Rica, Ecuador,
  Poland, UK, Armenia, Philippines, Egypt, Mexico,
  on immigrants and/or emigrants
• Most ask motives for migration, date of
  departure/arrival, remittances received
• Only a few ask about household composition and
  characteristics, migrants work, education, etc.,
  before departure (or arrival)

13
Example of Thailand 2006 LFS

• Carried out since 1963, quarterly since 2001,
  80,000 households/quarter, 26.7K monthly
• Covers all 76 provinces as PSUs, has 5,796
  Secondary Sample Units, 3/5 sample is urban
  though population is only 30 urban so must
  weight data
• Uses normal LF questionnaire, including wages
  (but no housing or assets data), in 4th quarter
  asks 19 questions on immigration, including
  duration of residence, whether registered, plans
  to remain or not, if worked in month before
  coming to T, whether sends , amount, use.

14
Experimental module on IM used in 4th quarter,
2006 (ILO/WB)

• 22 questions, for every member, referring to
  previous 12 mos.
• Ask if x received any /goods from elsewhere,
  times, amount, relationship to head, usage, etc.
• Asks if x is citizen of T, if not, where
• When 1st came to T, last time, from where
• Asks education, occupation, industry, etc., at
  time of arrival (can compare with current)

15
2006 Thai module (cont.)

• Missing items-- Thai language ability on arrival
  and now, marital status then and now, with whom
  came
• Only 0.6 of pop constituted by immigrants,
  mostly from 3 neighboring countries, estimated
  less than 500 persons (150 hhs?) born abroad
• Tabulations in report based on these numbers
  multiplied by national inflation factor of 823,
  obscuring real numbers this is reason for
  presenting raw numbers in reports
• No data on emigration, nor remittances received

16
Ecuador, Survey of Employment, Underemployment
and Unemployment

• 2005 national sample, 19,596 dwellings
• Module with 33 questions per emigrant when left,
  why, work status/occupation, marital status, etc.
• Some on current statuscountry of residence, age,
  education, work
• Remittances previous mo., 12 mos., no. times, use
  including investing, sector
• Independently, every person in household 18 is
  asked if received remittances ever, when, whether
  invested
• Gets current education but not at time of
  emigration, and marital status at emigration but
  not current
• Migration intentions asked only in hhs with
  emigrants

17
Survey on Overseas Filipinos

• Conducted annually by NSO since 1987, every
  October, sample currently 41,000 households
• Asks about those who left to work or travel
  overseas in past 5 years, characteristics now,
  and remittances received and by what means
• Results on web and in Yang et al. find 14 rise
  in number working abroad in 2006 vs. 2005,
  slightly more women than men, 17 rise in
  remittances, 95 in cash, 79 sent thru banks

18
National Survey of Occupation and Labour, 2007
(INEGI)

• 120,260 dwellings representative of states.
• Measures immigrants from questions on place of
  birth, previous residence, why came
• Measures emigrants by asking if any former member
  has left to live elsewhere, and why
• In 4th quarter of 2002, Module on Migration
  included with more questions, sample 80,000, asks
  residence 5 years ago, country/state of current
  residence, why/when left, means of transport,
  remittances sent
• Questions also for return migrants, including if
  went to USA to work, whether with legal docs

19
DHS surveys

• Advantagesmoderate sample sizes, 10-30 K
  households
• Already have detailed demog. data including on
  children ask residence
• Also, accustomed to orphanhood questions, so ask
  residence of siblings, etc
• Examples of Ecuador, Colombia

20
Ecuador DHS, 2004

• Explosion of emigration since 1995
• ENDEMAIN IV covered 28,908 households (CEPAR),
  with module on emigration
• Asks if anyone left in previous 5 years, when,
  characteristics of person when left, work in year
  before leaving, why left, current residence,
  remittances sent in past 12 months, frequency,
  amount, use
• Shows about 7 of households (over 1500) have an
  emigrant since 1999, 62 of which received
  remittances in past 12 months
• Could have asked about residence of absent
  children, migration intentions

21
LSMS surveys

• Advantage Rich economic data sets, so can use to
  better measure economic situation of migrants and
  non-migrants
• Flexibility Countries can add modules of
  interest
• Disadvantages Small sample size, long
  questionnaires already so hard to add to
• Examples of Ghana, Peru, Ecuador, Armenia, Albania

22
Key issue in surveys of migration use of
appropriate comparison groups

• To study either the D or C of migration, need
  data for both migrants and non-migrants (M N)
• For IM, to study the D, need data for both the M
  and the rest of the at-risk pop of N in the
  country of O, which serves as the appropriate
  comparison group
• But for whole hhs migrating, need data from hhs
  in D that migrated from O plus hhs in O that did
  not migrate
• Furthermore, need detailed data on the situation
  prior to the migration, of the individual and hh
  context. For individual M, get data from proxy
  respondent. For indiv N, from person.
• Time reference should be just before mig for
  migrants, and at the mean time of migration for
  N, in neither case, at the time of the survey!

23
In sum, to study migrations determinants

• In country of origin survey households with and
  without recent emigrants
• In country of destination survey recent
  immigrants originating in the country of origin
• Compare migrants at time of departure from
  origin with non-migrants at origin at the average
  time of departure of migrants

24
Sampling Migrants in specialized surveys of
international migration

• Absolute need for probability sampling
• Define survey purpose and hence appropriate
  comparison groups at outset (and countries!)
• Based on budget, define survey domain and target
  sample size and distribution
• Recognize that migrants are rare elements
• Find sampling framefor migrants and non-migrants
• Calculate proportions of population which are
  migrants of interest in PSUs, form strata

25
Sampling rare elements disproportionate sampling
from strata, two-phase sampling

• Example of country of Origin, select migrants and
  non-migrants
• Sample Primary Sampling Units such as provinces
  using disproportionate sampling, oversampling
  from strata with high proportions of
  international migrants
• Continue in subsequent stages, oversampling
• In final sample Ultimate Area Units (UAUs),
  conduct screening operation, use 2-phase
  sampling, first listing occupied households to
  identify those with migrants
• Oversample those with migrants, but also select
  households without conduct interviews

26
Examples of specialized surveys of international
migration

• NIDI
• Argentina
• IOM Surveys in Guatemala
• OthersMorocco, Maghreb (2007), Malaysia,
  Colombians in Ecuador

27
NiDi 7-country Push-Pulls Project on Causes of
Migration to EU, 1997-98

• 5 countries of O, Italy and Spain of D
• Common survey purpose, sampling methodology,
  questionnaires completed sample sizes 1100-2000
• Defined migrant households in O as those with
  member who left to live abroad without returning
  in previous 10 years
• In D defined as having someone come from one of
  two specific countries of O
• Rare elements, so used stratification, etc.
• Used appropriate comparison groups

28
NIDI-Eurostat Survey Project, 1997-1998

• Five countries of origin Turkey, Egypt, Morocco,
  Senegal and Ghana
• Two destinations Italy and Spain
• Common methodology samples, questionnaires
• Sample sizes range from 1100-2000
• Migrant person leaving/arriving in past 10 years

29
NIDI-Eurostat Survey Project, 1997-1998

• Migrants at destination Those originating from
  either of two countries of origin
• For immigrants from Egypt and Ghana in Italy,
  appropriate comparison groups are available
  non-migrants interviewed in Egypt and Ghana
• For immigrants from Morocco and Senegal in Spain,
  appropriate comparison groups are available
  non-migrants in Morocco and Senegal

30
Complementary Survey on International Migrants in
Argentina

• Survey in 2002-03 of migrants from 5 neighbouring
  countries, in main areas of residence of each (2
  to 6 for each, total of 18), not national sample
• Households interviewed if contained someone born
  in any of the 5 countries, so not focused on
  recent immig
• Used 2001 census to create sampling frame,
  two-stage sample in Buenos Aires region,
  one-stage elsewhere
• Sample sizes of 13,296 and 8,222, respectively
• Asks antecedents to coming, residence history in
  Arg., whether sent or received , residence of
  close relatives, property in origin country now,
  migration intentions, etc.

31
Example of IOM Surveys in Guatemala, 2002-present

• Annual surveys, national sample of 3,000
  households, based on 3-stage sample using 2002
  census to create sampling frame
• PSUs are districts (municipios) selected with
  PPES, , UAUs census sectors
• Listing operation performed on all 55,000
  dwellings in sample UAUs, then hhs with migrants
  selected with equal probability in country to
  interview
• Wealth of data obtained, many pamphlets
  published, with results, including on
  remittances, use for investment, effects on
  poverty of receiving households

32
Examples of questionnaire modules in country of
emigration

• To identify emigrants
• On work activity of emigrant prior to emigration
• On reasons for emigration
• On work activity in country of destination
• On migration intentions
• On remittances
• On return migrants