Profound Household Survey - Revision history

Katharina Wiedemann at 16:12, 8 August 2014

2014-08-08T16:12:10Z

Show changes

Ranisha at 14:38, 17 July 2014

2014-07-17T14:38:50Z

Wiki Gardener at 13:31, 4 June 2014

2014-06-04T13:31:57Z

Show changes

Wiki Gardener at 14:27, 21 June 2012

2012-06-21T14:27:48Z

Show changes

JanS at 11:38, 8 June 2010

2010-06-08T11:38:44Z

Show changes

Robert at 09:48, 7 June 2010

2010-06-07T09:48:02Z

Robert at 09:47, 7 June 2010

2010-06-07T09:47:51Z

Robert at 09:47, 7 June 2010

2010-06-07T09:47:01Z

Robert at 09:46, 7 June 2010

2010-06-07T09:46:48Z

Robert at 09:45, 7 June 2010

2010-06-07T09:45:50Z

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 <br/>
-{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="1" align="left" style="width: 622px;  width: 100%"
+{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="1" align="left" style="width: 622px; width: 100%"
 |-
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 622px;  background-color: rgb(255, 255, 204)" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 622px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 204)" |
 '''<span>Box</span><span></span><span>1</span>: Options for Choice of Control Region'''
@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 {| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="1" style="width: 100%"
 |-
-| style="width: 151px;  background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
+| style="width: 151px; background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
 '''Observation fields'''
-| style="width: 151px;  background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
+| style="width: 151px; background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
 '''MDG relevance'''
-| style="width: 151px;  background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
+| style="width: 151px; background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
 '''Indicator'''
-| style="width: 151px;  background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
+| style="width: 151px; background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
 '''What to measure?'''
-| style="width: 151px;  background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
+| style="width: 151px; background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153)" |
 '''Applicable for'''
@@ Line 104: / Line 104: @@
 Increased income from homebusiness activities facilitated by improved working conditions
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Average monthly net income from productive use of electricity
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 Increased agricultural activity
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Annual agricultural yields
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 136: / Line 136: @@
 Decrease of women’s workload
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *(Women’s) daily working hours and general time use
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 152: / Line 152: @@
 Increased time and money available for school education and learning
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Enrolment and attendance rates by school type and gender
 *Number of absence days per year (incl. absence reason)
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 163: / Line 163: @@
 Improved effective level of education of school children
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Percentages of children who know to read – for example – a newspaper article (by age)
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 179: / Line 179: @@
 Increased use of information and communication facilities
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Usage pattern of TV, video, DVD, radio, cell phone, landline phone
 *Purpose of use of TV, video, DVD, radio, cell phone, landline phone
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
+E
@@ Line 196: / Line 196: @@
 Improved indoor air quality in households
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Percentage of household members with eye infections and respiratory diseases by gender and age categories
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 206: / Line 206: @@
 Decrease in medical costs for diseases related to indoor air pollution
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Expenditure on treatment of respiratory and eye diseases
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
 S & E
@@ Line 224: / Line 224: @@
 Increased medical service use
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Percentage of households using medical services (vaccination etc.)
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
+E
@@ Line 234: / Line 234: @@
 Improved health situation
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Percentage of household members with recurrent diseases by gender and age categories
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
+E
@@ Line 247: / Line 247: @@
 Improved maternal health situation
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 284px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 284px" |
 *Maternal health indicators
-| style="vertical-align: top;  width: 79px" |
+| style="vertical-align: top; width: 79px" |
+E
@@ Line 259: / Line 259: @@
 = Further Information =
-*see "[https://energypedia.info/Methoden Methods]" <br/>
+*see "[[Catalogue_of_Methods_for_Impact_Studies|Methods]]"<br/>
 = References<br/> =
@@ Line 267: / Line 267: @@
 <references />
 [[Category:Impacts]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:48, 7 June 2010
Line 44:		Line 44:
	<br>		<br>

		+	<br>
		+
		+	<br>

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:47, 7 June 2010
Line 41:		Line 41:

	<br>		<br>
		+
		+	<br>
		+

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:47, 7 June 2010
Line 32:		Line 32:
	<br>		<br>

		+	<br>

		+	<br>

		+	<br>

		+	<br>

−		+	<br>
−

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 |-
 | valign="top" width="622" |
-'''<font size="2"><span>Box</span><span> </span><span>1</span>: Options for Choice of Control Region</font>'''
+'''<span>Box</span><span> </span><span>1</span>: Options for Choice of Control Region'''
-<font size="2">The obvious counterfactual situation for the stove and electrification projects would be Option A – a region where these interventions have not been taken place before. However, Option B provides as well for a viable counterfactual. While Option A investigates in how far the project sites outperform the control regions, Option B explores in how far the project sites catch up in relation to the control regions. The crucial point is that between the before and the after survey, no such intervention takes places. At this point, one disadvantage of Option A becomes evident: It is often not for sure that during that time period the control region actually remains non-electrified or without improved stoves interventions respectively. It has already happened that unforeseen activities by other donors or partner country institutions in the course of the project period rendered the implementation of this approach impossible. On the other hand, Option A has the advantage that it can serve as an “ex-ante impact assessment”. This implies that the information gathered in the control regions helps to anticipate the beneficiary’s behaviour, potential difficulties and opportunities to be expected in the wake of the EnDev project before project implementation. These findings can then potentially be fed back into the project design.</font>
+The obvious counterfactual situation for the stove and electrification projects would be Option A – a region where these interventions have not been taken place before. However, Option B provides as well for a viable counterfactual. While Option A investigates in how far the project sites outperform the control regions, Option B explores in how far the project sites catch up in relation to the control regions. The crucial point is that between the before and the after survey, no such intervention takes places. At this point, one disadvantage of Option A becomes evident: It is often not for sure that during that time period the control region actually remains non-electrified or without improved stoves interventions respectively. It has already happened that unforeseen activities by other donors or partner country institutions in the course of the project period rendered the implementation of this approach impossible. On the other hand, Option A has the advantage that it can serve as an “ex-ante impact assessment”. This implies that the information gathered in the control regions helps to anticipate the beneficiary’s behaviour, potential difficulties and opportunities to be expected in the wake of the EnDev project before project implementation. These findings can then potentially be fed back into the project design.&lt;/font&gt;
 |}

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 |}
-<br>'''Included Tools:'''
 *Household questionnaire draft