Using Household Surveys to Study the Economic and Social Implications of Migration: A Methodological Evaluation* Regional Training Workshop on International Migration Statistics Cairo-Egypt 30 June – July 3, 2009 Jeronimo Cortina *The views expressed here are those of their respective authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the University of Houston or of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).

Global project on migration What is the Issue? –Little attention, has been devoted to weigh the impact of international migration on sending countries and specifically on the left-behind Why Did the Issue Arise? –Reliable national-level data about the incidence and magnitude of international migration (of adults or children) and on those left behind are rare because estimating these numbers is extremely difficult due to a range of methodological problems What are the Implications of not Having Reliable and Valid Data? –Lack any comparability among other sources due to different uses of categories and formats –Limit the generalizability of these data –Public policy formulation may rest on analyses that may lack any reliability or validity and thus have potential implications regarding implementation and outcomes

Household surveys to “measure”/”study” migration? Why? 1.Provides a more dynamic picture of migration 2.Cheaper than a national census 3.Research specific (what kind of indicators are expected?) How? 1.Stand alone survey 2.Migration module can be introduced in national labor surveys, income and expenditure, LSMS, DHS, etc. with a specific longitudinal framework

Albania, Ecuador and Morocco Objective: Impact of migration on children-left behind in two dimensions 1.Economic: remittances uses and purposes, HH SES characteristics (pre/post migration) 2.Subjective: Health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression health state indicators) Life-Satisfaction (family, friends, school, self, living environment - life satisfaction scale) Communication patterns

Definitions Migrant Household: A household with children (0-17 yrs. of age) in which at least one member (who ate out of the same pot and slept in the same dwelling) who is still considered to be a part of that household has moved to live in a foreign country. Non-migrant Household: A household with children (0-17 yrs. of age) in which no members (who eats out of the same pot and sleep in the same dwelling) have ever moved away from the household. Region: An artificial construct, created by selecting geographical or administrative areas for which it is known or expected that they contain relatively high proportions of migrant households. A region may contain areas that are not necessarily contiguous and may be made up of one or more such areas.

Sampling strategy Two-phase sampling strategy devised by EuroStat and NiDi 1.Chose study regions: high economic development, low economic development and high vs. low migration 2.Classify geographical areas within each region according to the estimated prevalence of households with international migration 3.Create strata to classify areas according to the (relative) prevalence of households with international migration experience. 4.Sample areas from each “prevalence rate” stratum, whereby areas with higher expected prevalence of migrant households are over-sampled 5.Screen households in areas selected and prepare a list identifying all households as migrant or non-migrant households. 6.Create strata of migrant and non-migrant households for each sample area. 7.Allocate a disproportionate share of the sample for each area to the stratum of migrant households (i.e., over-sample migrant households). 8.Interview clusters of non-migrant households in each area as needed to economize on fieldwork time and costs.

Sampling strategy Migrant and Non-Migrants households are included in the sample and prescreened. The former are oversampled Advantages – Designed to take into account the inherit characteristics of migration – “Relatively” easy to adapt to different available information and particular country needs – Sample design takes into account population of interest and “control” group Disadvantages – National representativeness might be an issue – More field work – Without knowledge/information may be difficult to implement

Listing form

Indicators

Survey Ecuador 1,401 respondents 595 Children 806 Adults Albania 1,482 respondents 611 Children 871 Adults 300 RR=265/300= 88% 150 migrant households RR=116/150=77% 75 urban RR=70/75=93% 75 rural RR=46/75=61% 150 non-migrant households RR=149/150=99% 75 urban RR=71/75=95% 75 rural RR=78/75=104% * 300 RR=299/300= 99% 150 migrant households RR=157/150=105% * 75 urban RR=81/75=108% * 75 rural RR=76/75=101% * 150 non-migrant households RR=142/150=95% 75 urban RR=68/75=91% 75 rural RR=74/75=99%

Results No significant difficulties in filling the health and life-satisfaction modules Migration is associated with – Sadness and solitude – An opportunity to have access to a better quality of life. Migration has both positive and negative impacts Family as a whole suffer emotionally Marriages tend to be affected by migration Caretakers experience high levels of stress and responsibility Remittances are spent on health, education, basic consumption, clothing and daily needs Migrants and their family members left-behind communicate frequently

Predicted probabilities Albania Predicted probabilities Ecuador

Morocco & 2009 National Demographic Survey Government, Civil Society, International Organizations Negotiations to implement an oversample of migrants Will work together to design sampling frame and training

Conclusions & next steps Migration’s material and immaterial impacts on those left-behind Capacity building Collaborative work between Government, International Organization and Civil Society