A Proposal to HALOHALO
to Improve the Household Survey
Kanta TAKEUCHI, Natsuki HARADA, Tomoki MIZUGUCHI, Natsumi YAMAGUCHI
We propose the following 6 suggestions to HALOHALO for improving the household survey.
- Record market purchases, home production, and in-kind transactions, and list the most common and widely consumed items.
- Add “loan payment at the sari-sari store” as an option in the purchase method of the questionnaire to eliminate confusion for interviewers.
- Conduct a 7-day recall-type survey of major food items that are widely consumed in the HOPE area.
- Examine the average diet.
- Devise the layout efficiently by using a questionnaire with Skip Codes or verbatim questions.
- Switch to self-administered responses to questions, considering the literacy of interviewees.
Cebu Island is one of the most popular tourist destinations in Southeast Asia, blessed with natural environment of clear waters and abundant species. However, while tourism is flourishing, there are still poor residential areas where houses are densely packed like slums. Though Cebu is crowded with tourists along the glamorous shining sea, many local people manage to make a living by selling accessories to tourists. Slums are spread across the seaside, and the people are striving to make an earning for their daily lives.
In 2017, HALOHALO, a non-profit organization that conducts livelihood support, education, and awareness-raising projects for communities on Cebu Island, conducted a household survey in the HOPE District of Dumulog Village in Talisay City of Cebu Province, to investigate the actual household consumption. However, the survey results may have recorded poorer living conditions than the actual situation, and HALOHALO concluded that the survey was inaccurate. Thus, a group of students at Keio University, in cooperation with HALOHALO, updated the questionnaire from 2017 and conducted a simplified household survey in the same area in August 2023. The following year, in August 2024, the group plans to visit Cebu again to conduct a large-scale household survey similar to the one in 2017, the one conducted in 2023 was a preliminary survey to improve the quality of the 2024 survey. In preparing the questionnaire, we used the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) conducted by the Philippine Statistics Office, the official data of the Philippine government, as a reference.
This proposal suggests improvements to the household survey based on the preliminary survey conducted in August 2023. Section 1 analyzes the household survey conducted by HALOHALO in 2017, based on the findings of the preliminary survey conducted by the students at Keio University, and suggests 3 ways to improve the household survey. (C) Conduct a 7-day recall-type survey of major food items that are widely consumed in the HOPE area, (A) Record market purchases, home production, and in-kind transactions, and list the most common and widely consumed items, and (B) Add the “sari-sari store” as an option in the purchase method of the questionnaire to eliminate confusion for interviewers.
Section 2 considers the good points and problems of the preliminary survey conducted on August 3, August 4, and August 7, 2023. Based on the problems, we suggest the following. (C) Conducting a 7-day recall-type survey of major food items that are widely consumed in the HOPE area, (D) Examining the average diet, (B) Adding the “sari-sari store” as an option in the purchase method of the questionnaire to eliminate confusion for interviewers, and (E) Devise the layout efficiently by using a questionnaire with Skip Codes or verbatim questions.
Section 3 suggests (C) Conducting a 7-day recall-type survey of major food items that are widely consumed in the HOPE area, (A) Recording market purchases, home production, and in-kind transactions, and listing the most common and widely consumed items, and (F) Switching to self-administered responses to questions, considering the literacy of interviewees.
In the Appendix, we introduce the FIES as a possible reference to improve the HALOHALO household survey, considering the problems shown in the proposal. Specifically, we will address the elements of the questionnaire that constitute the accuracy and validity of the FIES and indicate the items that are important in the design of the questionnaire. We will first provide an overview of the FIES, trace the content of the questions used in the survey conducted in 2018, and introduce the alterations of questions in the surveys conducted to date. We will then look at the FIES from 1985 to 2018 and show the importance of adopting columns asking in cash, in-kind, and gifts, as well as questions adapting to the current social situation. Lastly, address the elements of the FIES that compose the accuracy and validity, which should be used as a reference in improving HALOHALO’s household survey.
References
-
Beegle, Kathleen, Joachim De Weerdt, Jed Friedman and John Gibson, “Methods of household consumption measurement through surveys: Experimental results from Tanzania,” Journal of Development Economics, Vol.98, Issue.1, 2012, pp.3-18.
-
Bowling, Ann, “Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality,” Journal of Public Health, VoI.27, No.3, 2005, pp.281–291.
-
Grosh, Margaret, and Paul Glewwe, “Designing Household Survey Questionnaires for Developing Countries,” The World Bank, Vol.1, 2000, pp.43-74.
-
Philippine Statistic Authority, 2018 Family Income and Expenditure Survey, Philippine Statistics Authority, 2020.
-
Scott, Chris, Martin Vaessen, Sidiki Coulibaly and Jane Verrall, “Verbatim Questionnaires Versus Field Translation or Schedules: An Experimental Study,” International Statistical Review, Vol.56, No.3, 1988, pp.259-278.
-
Smith, Lisa C., Olivier Dupriez and Nathalie Troubat “Assessment of the Reliability and Relevance of the Food Data Collected in National Household Consumption and Expenditure,” IHSN Working Paper, No.8, 2014, pp.1-69.
-
Vyas, Seema and Lilani Kumaranayake, “Constructing socio-economic status indices: how to use principal components analysis,” Health Policy and Planning, Vol.21, No.6, 2006, pp.459-468.