Standardized Survey Bulletin 1 March 2003 The Standardized Survey Bulletin presents key welfare outcome indicators extracted from surveys conducted byAfrican National Statistical Offices (NSOs). The survey data files have been reformat- ted and standardized by the Operational Quality and Knowledge Services Unit of the World Banks Africa Region to facilitate comparisons across and within data sets. Ghana Living Standards Survey, 1998/99 G hana's population of 18.9 million ac- ences. Rural poverty was estimated at al- counts for 2.9 percent of Sub-Sa- most 50 percent, while urban poverty was haran Africa total population. Life estimated at 19 percent. The Millennium expectancy is approximately 60 years Development Goal (MDG) calls for poverty while the adult HIV/AIDS prevalence (15 to be halved between 1990 and 2015. Per- 49 years) rate stands at about 4 percent. centage of population in poverty fell from 51 percent in 1991/92 to about 42 percent in 1998/99, thus the target poverty number in 2015 should be 25 percent. GDP Growth Scenarios and Poverty Reduction Poverty projection based on Starting from 2002, when the annual 80 3.3% and 6.0% growth rates 3.3 m GDP growth is 6 percent (a target set cedis 70 out by the PRSP), the poverty rate will PRSP targeted y 60 Real GDP 1.9 m GDP per capita fall to 12 percent by 2015. This reduces per capita cedis poverty by more than half than antici- povert 50 of 40 38.4 pated by the MDG. A reduction by half means that GDP growth rates must be 30 Percent 25.1 at 3.3 percent. Given the past decade 20 Poverty target = 25% of about 4 percent GDP growth rate, the 10 12.0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 poverty MDG is likely to be achieved in Ghana. Data sources: Staff calculation based on GLSSIV 98 and World Bank Africa LDB. The government just published the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, whose main objective is to reduce poverty and improve the welfare of Ghanaians. The About the survey poverty reduction strategy emphasizes Survey sample size 5,998 households economic growth, integrated rural devel- 26,411respondents opment, employment expansion, and im- Year of survey 1998/99 Findings proved access to social amenities, such as Survey administration Ghana Statistical Service education, health care, water, and sani- Reports Ghana Living Standards Survey tation. Report of the Fourth Round (GLSS 4) Poverty Trends in Ghana in the Poverty reduction 1990s Contact GLSS Project Technical Director Ghana Statistical Service Based on the Ghana Living Standards Sur- P.O. Box GP 1098, Accra, Ghana vey (GLSS) IV, overall poverty was esti- mated at less than 40 percent in 1998. This, however, masks regional differ- Standardized Survey Bulletin The Africa Household Survey Databank and Standardized Survey Files The Africa Household Survey Databank (AHSDB) contains one of the one household level and one individual level data. They provide readily largest collection of household surveys onAfrica in the World. It is main- accessible social and living standards at the national level, as well as at tained by the Bank, but the surveys remain the property of the relevant sub-national levels for different income groups. Once survey data files National Statistical Office (NSO) that carried out the survey. TheAHSDB have been standardized, they can be accessed and queried through currently contains Household Budget Surveys (HBS), Living Standards the World Banks Intranet. The program is still in its development stage, Measurement Surveys (LSMS), Integrated and Priority Surveys (IS and but once completed, the standardized files and indicators will be directly PS), Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), and the Core Welfare accessible on the Internet. Indicators Questionnaire (CWIQ) surveys. The surveys vary greatly in This Standardized Survey Bulletin is one of the products from the SFSI scope and structure, the need to make the data more accessible and program. It provides a description of the key survey findings, which can available in user friendly formats has led to the establishment of the Stan- be used to facilitate the monitoring of a countrys progress towards the dard files and Standard Indicators (SFSI) Project. For more information, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). To find out more, visit http:// visit http://www.worldbank.org/afr/poverty/databank on the web. www.worldbank.org/ afr/stats on the web. What are Standard Files and Standard Indicators? What are the Millennium Development Goals? The objective of the SFSI program is to facilitate the monitoring of social The Millennium Development Goals (MDG) have been commonly and economic outcomes of national development programs, such as Pov- accepted as a framework for measuring development progress. The erty Reduction Strategy Papers. Standard files, extracted from house- goals focus efforts on achieving significant, measurable improvements in hold survey data, comprise a common set of core variables. These vari- peoples lives. The first seven goals are directed at reducing poverty in ables have common definitions and can be used to produce needed all its forms. The last goal is about global partnership for development. indicators in real time. Two standard files are produced for each survey, For information, visit: http://www.developmentgoals.org But this simulation of the na- Characteristics of typical Ghana De jure female-headed house- tional average poverty reduction households holds, which means that the head based on GDP per capita growth uses does not have a husband, consti- the most recent income distribution Average household size is 4.4. tute nearly twice as many as de from a1998 survey, and assumes Poor households are significantly facto female-headed households. that it will be constant for the simu- larger than non-poor households; The relationship between area of lation period. Although on average the average household size in poor residence, poverty, and educa- poverty was reduced and further households is 6.0 persons com- tional attainment of the house- reduction is expected regional pared to 2.9 persons in the non- hold head is extremely signifi- variations are large. Standards of poor households. cant. living in some areas may have de- The ratio of dependents to work- About 76 percent of heads of rural teriorated in recent years, espe- ing-age people (aged 15 to 64) is poor households had little or no cially in the northern regions. If much higher for the poor than for education; 47 percent of heads of poor regions do not share the future the non-poor households. Con- rural rich households had little or growth, there will be less poverty re- versely, rural households have a no education. duction. More detailed regional pov- much higher age dependency In urban areas, 59 percent of erty projections can be calculated than urban households. heads of poor households had little if the regional economic growth or no education, compared to only rates are available. Although households are still pre- dominantly male-headed, with a 19 percent from the rich house- national average of 67 percent, fe- holds. The average education level male-headed households have in- of household heads is lower creased, reaching 33 percent. among the urban poor than among the rural rich. 2 Ghana Living Standards Survey 1998/99 Of the working aged population How much do Ghanians spend? holds spent more than nine times (1564), 57 percent are employed. that of the poorest households. By area of residence, differences Disparity in total household expen- When a separation is made be- are small, since 58 percent in the ditures. An average per capita tween urban and rural house- rural areas and 57 percent in the household income is Cedis holds, the differences are even urban areas are employed. Nearly 119,877 per month. However, this more extreme, with the poorest half of the population employed masks massive variations be- rural households spending Cedis was female (51 percent). tween groups and within regions. 23,107 per month, compared to The richest 20 percent of house- the poorest urban households, who consumed Cedis 38,436 al- most twice as much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tandardized Survey Bulletin Food security. Poor households al- Slightly over 50 percent of the Most patients sought modern locate a higher share of their ex- population can read and write in medical treatment; about half of penditures to food than non-poor any language. By area of resi- them sought services from pri- households. Differences across dence, 68 percent of the popula- vate service providers. wealth groups are more marked tion in urban areas are literate In rural areas, a slightly larger in urban than in rural areas. while in rural areas only 43 per- proportion of poor patients sought Rural-urban differences are im- cent are. private services than did rich pa- portant rural households spend Marked gender disparities in adult tients, while in urban areas, nearly 62 percent of their income (aged 15+) literacy rates persist, more rich patients turned to pri- on food while urban households particularly for the poorest popu- vate services. spend 55 percent. lation in rural areas. A higher Health expenditure. On average, percentage of male literacy by age Access to safe drinking water households spend 3.7 percent of indicates former gender bias fa- their expenditure on health. Ur- voring boys. About 60 percent of households ban household spend nearly the The youth (aged 1524) literacy have access to safe water. same proportion as rural house- rate has improved significantly at The area of residence predomi- holds. 66 percent, indicating a good im- nantly determines access to safe Education. On average, house- provement in basic education in drinking water. About 80 percent holds spend 3.9 percent of house- recent years. of urban households have access hold expenditure on education. The gender gap between women to safe drinking water, while 48 Poor rural and poor urban house- and men in youth literacy is much percent of rural households have holds spend a higher proportion of narrower than in adult literacy, access. This implies that rural their budget on education than demonstrating the effect of pro- households are more prone to their rich counterparts. For ex- moting girls basic education. water-borne diseases. ample, poor rural households on The rural urban gap between The proportion of non-poor house- average spend 3.5 percent of bud- women and men in youth literacy holds with access to safe drinking get on education, while the rural is also much narrower than in water is higher than poor house- rich households spend only 2 per- adult literacy, demonstrating the holds, especially in urban areas. cent. effect of promoting basic educa- Urban areas have very good ac- Rural households spend less on tion in rural areas. cess to piped water (78 percent); education than the urban house- The recent efforts to promote ba- needless to say, such access is low holds (3.1 vs. 5 percent). sic education in rural areas in rural areas (20 percent). among girls and the poor need to Do household wealth, area of continue; literacy gaps still exist, Fuel and environmental stability residence and gender affect although to a lesser extent. education attainment and literacy? Firewood is the main source of Self reported morbidity and health fuel, although regional differ- Gender differentials exist (girls care ences persist. have higher enrollment rates Traditional fuel is the main than boys) at the primary level The non-poor are more likely to source of fuel for rural residents even by area of residence. report illnesses than the poor, (97 percent), with more poor Rural-urban gap in secondary en- especially in rural areas (34 vs. households using firewood and rollment ratio is significant. Net 24 percent). Although, the poor more rich households using char- secondary enrollment ratio is 7 may feel ill, they often cannot af- coal. percent among rural children, ford to be sick. Charcoal (62 percent) is the pre- versus 16 percent among urban Rural households are more likely dominant source of fuel for urban children, which depicts an urban to report sickness than urban households. bias in educational opportunities. households (28 vs. 23 percent). Among urban rich, only 26 percent Very few children in rural poor Less than 45 percent of those who of households use non-traditional households attend secondary reported illness sought medical fuel, such as kerosene, electricity, schools. The net secondary enroll- care, but this masks rural-urban and gas. ment ratio is 3 percent for the ru- differences. ral poor, while it is 19 percent for Less than 40 percent of rural pa- the urban non-poor. Being poor tients sought treatment, but 53 means that the chances of going percent of urban patients did so. to secondary school remain low. 4 Ghana Living Standards Survey 1998/99 ([SHQGLWXUH 4XLQWLOH 1DWLRQDO 5XUDO 8UEDQ 8QLW RI 3RRUHVW 5LFKHVW 3RRUHVW 5LFKHVW 3RRUHVW 5LFKHVW 0HDVXUH $OO $OO $OO ,QGLFDWRUV 0'* (GXFDWLRQ DQG /LWHUDF\ 0'* 3URPRWH *HQGHU (TXDOLW\ $FFHVV WR SULPDU\ VFKRRO ZLWKLQ PLQXWHV 3HUFHQW 1HW SULPDU\ HQUROOPHQW UDWH 7RWDO 3HUFHQW 0DOH 3HUFHQW )HPDOH 3HUFHQW 1HW VHFRQGDU\ HQUROOPHQW UDWH 7RWDO 3HUFHQW 0DOH 3HUFHQW )HPDOH 3HUFHQW 7HUWLDU\ HQUROPHQW UDWH SHU 7RWDO SHU $GXOW OLWHUDF\ UDWH 7RWDO 3HUFHQW 0DOH 3HUFHQW )HPDOH 3HUFHQW