Abstract
We analyse the use of the concept of household in sample surveys, with evidence drawn from a review of survey definitions, a series of in-depth interviews with data producers and users, and a systematic study of recent literature. We consider the place of the concept within the discipline of demography, and demonstrate how its definition and use interact with cultural values and core concepts integral to the discipline. Focusing on Tanzania as a case study, we examine the diversity of factors that influence the construction of household-level data from cross-sectional household surveys. Throughout the survey process, contrasting interpretations of the meaning of household and different motivations for using specific definitions of the term interact. This generates data and outputs with potential for undercounting, bias, and misrepresentations, with adverse effects on the quality of data used for monitoring development indicators. Some ways of improving data collection on households are proposed.
Notes
1. Sara Randall is at the Department of Anthropology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK. E-mail: [email protected]. Ernestina Coast and Tiziana Leone are at the Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics & Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK.
2. This research was funded by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council (RES-175-25-0014) under the Survey Design and Measurement Initiative. We would like to thank Beth Bishop and Katerina Georgiadis for their excellent work as research assistants, and all the respondents who have discussed their use of surveys with us. We were given valuable insights by participants in two meetings: the Association Internationale des Démographes de Langue Française (AIDELF) conference in Quebec, 2008, and a day meeting on households sponsored by the British Society for Population Society that was organized by the authors in 2008. The paper was much improved as a result of detailed comments on an earlier version by three anonymous reviewers.