Quantitative data collection on the status of Roma in SEE and CEE: Methodology, Purpose, and Policy Application - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Quantitative data collection on the status of Roma in SEE and CEE: Methodology, Purpose, and Policy Application PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 70d550-NTE4Y



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Quantitative data collection on the status of Roma in SEE and CEE: Methodology, Purpose, and Policy Application

Description:

Quantitative data collection on the status of Roma in SEE and CEE: Methodology, Purpose, and Policy Application Susanne Milcher Specialist, Poverty and Economic ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:70
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 23
Provided by: Andre754
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Quantitative data collection on the status of Roma in SEE and CEE: Methodology, Purpose, and Policy Application


1
Quantitative data collection on the status of
Roma in SEE and CEEMethodology, Purpose, and
Policy Application
  • Susanne Milcher
  • Specialist, Poverty and Economic Development
  • UNDP Regional Centre
  • Bratislava
  • (17 September 2004)

2
Outline
  • General problems with ethnic data
  • The baseline survey methodology
  • Policy application
  • Future steps

3
Problems with relevant data
  • Governments reluctant to collect
  • Political considerations
  • Constitutional constraints
  • Constituencies reluctant to share
  • Desire to avoid discrimination and stigmatization
  • Desire to keep distance from the state
  • As a result
  • Opportunities to misuse and misinterpret data
    deficits
  • But all aware that data is necessary

4
UNDP approach to the issue
  • Reliable quality quantitative data is a necessary
  • precondition for relevant policies. It means
    data,
  • which is
  • Relevant, adequately reflecting reality
  • Comparable both between countries and with
    majority populations (control group) in
    individual countries over time
  • Respecting privacy making sure will not be
    misused, individual is protected against
    discrimination

5
How to get there? The survey
  • Problems are of technical, methodological and
    legal nature and specific problems require
    specific approaches
  • Clear division of roles between international and
    national actors necessary in the short, mid and
    long run (phase-out strategy)
  • Link to MDGs monitoring (baseline)

6
How to get there?
  • Relevancy related primarily to communities
    involvement in data collection (Roma interviewers
    where possible, assistant interviewers in other
    cases)
  • Comparability applying consistent methodologies
    in different countries following the format HBS
    and LFS
  • Include majority boosters
  • Respecting privacy not using registry data

7
Previous experience
  • Regional UNDP/ILO large scale survey on Roma in
    five Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries
    conducted in 2001
  • Situation of Roma from a human development
    perspective
  • How much worse and specific characteristics of
    their status
  • Answering these specific and concrete questions
    in quantitative figures is a necessary
    precondition both for understanding the
    underlying causes and addressing them adequately

8
Roma poverty profiles
9
Roma Deprivation indicators ( of people
lacking access to)
10
Roma Deprivation indicators ( of people
lacking access to)
11
Roma Unemployment (ILO definition)
12
The survey I
  • Supposed to provide base-line data for the
    Decade progress monitoring and for NTL policy
    purposes
  • Covers all countries in SEE and CEE with sizeable
    Roma minorities (Decade )
  • Where relevant, has IDPs and refugees boosters
  • Will be the basis of a regional vulnerability
    report
  • Could be used as a pilot for similar data
    collection exercises in the region

13
The survey II
  • The unit of analysis household
  • Main interviewee head of the household
  • Universe studied households in Roma settlements
  • Roma settlements municipalities or
    neighborhoods with high concentration of Roma
  • Territorial unit municipalities with share of
    Roma population equal or above the NTL average as
    registered by the census

14
The sampling model assumptions
  • Census understate absolute numbers but reflect
    the structure and distribution (where those
    people are?)
  • The major disparities visible at the level of
    municipalities
  • Comparability with the majority in proximity
    more important than with national average
  • Majority boosters a benchmark sample for
    comparisons with non-Roma in similar
    socioeconomic environment

15
Inevitable impediments
  • Sample may be under-representing integrated Roma
  • Majority population in proximity may not be
    sufficient for constructing a booster
  • Concentrated Roma neighborhood may still
    constitute a share lower than the NTL average
  • Data not representative for sub-grouping

16
What shall the survey provide?
  • Household representative information,
    census-type allowing approximations for
  • Poverty rates and depth
  • Levels and sources of income
  • Educational attainment, completion rates,
    enrollment rate and functional literacy
  • General picture of health status and access to
    health services
  • Dwellings characteristics (water, sanitation) for
    deprivation indicators
  • All this - disaggregated by age, sex, income
    status of the household and sub-national level

17
Dose of realism (the inevitable constraints)
  • Not all indicators are possible to be monitored
    or disaggregated
  • Data (as any data perhaps) still approximation
    and should be used as complementary to other
    statistics
  • Cross-country comparability will be limited (if
    necessary at all)

18
Time-frame
  • Completed sampling methodology and questionnaire
  • August/September translating, back translation
    and testing of the questionnaire sampling
  • End of August identification of
    assistant-interviewers and first training (Sofia)
  • October field-work
  • November data available
  • First quarter 2005 Vulnerability Assessment

19
Policy application
  • Only based on quantitative data can the actors
    involved (governments, donors, implementing
    partners) outline priorities and measure progress
  • Disaggregated quantitative data is a precondition
    for relevant national-level policies for
    sustainable inclusion of vulnerable groups and
    Roma in particular
  • Monitoring and evaluation of national-level
    policies, what impact has been achieved?

20
Future steps and possible cooperation
  • Improve methodologies for vulnerability analysis
    to establish disaggregated data collection
    capacities at the country level in 2-3 years
  • Work with National Statistical Offices on
    practical projects on data disaggregation
  • Elaborate possible approaches to overcome legal
    barriers
  • Encourage and coordinate advocacy campaign for
    new approach to group-related data, incl.
    ethnic groups

21
Links to other Roma-related initiatives
  • Follow up to first regional report Avoiding the
    Dependency Trap
  • Decade of Roma Inclusion baseline and monitoring
  • Measuring the progress at national level (Czech
    Republic and Hungary)
  • WB Living Standards assessment
  • Roma Development Opportunities Web-site,
    http//roma.undp.sk

22
Thank you!
  • Bratislava Regional Center
  • 35 Grosslingova
  • 81109 Bratislava, Slovak Republic
  • 421 2 59337 111
  • www.undp.sk
  • http//roma.undp.sk
  • http//mdgr.undp.sk
About PowerShow.com