24.07.2013 Views

General household survey - Statistics South Africa

General household survey - Statistics South Africa

General household survey - Statistics South Africa

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Statistics</strong> <strong>South</strong> <strong>Africa</strong> 44<br />

P0318<br />

18.3 Response rates<br />

The national response rate for the <strong>survey</strong> was 94,2%. The highest response rate (99,2%) was recorded in<br />

KwaZulu-Natal and the lowest in Gauteng (80,8%).<br />

Table 14: Response rates per province, GHS 2011<br />

Province Per cent<br />

Western Cape 91,3<br />

Eastern Cape 98,9<br />

Northern Cape 94,1<br />

Free State 97,3<br />

KwaZulu-Natal 99,2<br />

North West 97,0<br />

Gauteng 80,8<br />

Mpumalanga 97,6<br />

Limpopo 99,1<br />

<strong>South</strong> <strong>Africa</strong> 94,2<br />

18.4 Data revisions<br />

Stats SA revised the population model to produce mid-year population estimates during 2008 in the light of<br />

the findings of the Community Survey 2007 and new HIV/AIDS and mortality data. The new data have<br />

been used to adjust the benchmarking for all previous datasets. Weighting and benchmarking were also<br />

adjusted for the provincial boundaries that came into effect in December 2006. The data for the GHS 2002<br />

to GHS 2011 as presented in this release are therefore comparable.<br />

As a result of statistical programs used for weighting, which discards records with unspecified values for<br />

the benchmarking variables, namely age, sex and population group, it became necessary to impute<br />

missing values for these variables. A combination of logical and hot-deck imputation methods were used to<br />

impute the demographic variables of the whole series from 2002 to 2011.<br />

Household estimates that were developed using the UN headship ratio methodology were used to weight<br />

<strong>household</strong> files. The databases of Census 1996, Census 2001, Community Survey 2007 and the Labour<br />

Force Survey 2003, Labour Force Survey 2005, and Quarterly Labour Force Survey (quarter 3) of 2009<br />

were used to analyse trends and develop models to predict the number of <strong>household</strong>s for each year. The<br />

weighting system was based on tables for the expected distribution of <strong>household</strong> heads for specific age<br />

categories, per population group and province.<br />

Missing values and unknown values were excluded from totals used as denominators for the calculation of<br />

percentages, unless otherwise specified. Frequency values have been rounded off to the nearest<br />

thousand. Population totals in all tables reflect the population and sub-populations as calculated with SAS<br />

and rounded off. This will not always correspond exactly with the sum of the preceding rows because all<br />

numbers are rounded off to the nearest thousand.<br />

18.5 Limitations of the study<br />

It is important to note that the questionnaires for the GHS series were revised extensively in 2009 and that<br />

some questions might not be exactly comparable to the data series before then. Please refer to Section<br />

18.10 for more details about the questions that are not comparable. Analysts and users of the data are also<br />

advised not to do a comparative analysis over time before studying the questionnaires of the years<br />

concerned in detail, as there have also been small modifications to options to a number of questions that<br />

are not highlighted in Section 18.10. Unlike some previous years when data were collected only during<br />

July, the data collection since GHS 2009 was spread over a three-month period. This is not necessarily a<br />

limitation, but should be borne in mind when using the data for comparative purposes.<br />

<strong>General</strong> Household Survey, July 2011

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!