Syndicate content

Add new comment

(Note: The title of this comment was edited shortly after posting for better clarity) Fourth: why wasn't consumption included in the 1998 baseline? The answer is partly that, although many academics prefer consumption as a measure of household well-being, views are far from unanimous. Different literatures and regions have different preferences- for example many Latin American countries prefer to use income indicators, while in other regions consumption-based measures are more common. Secondly, in 1998 it was essential to collect information on income sources in order to design appropriate livelihood programs. Adding a full consumption module would have been a big challenge, especially as many items consumed were produced or collected by the household, and very difficult to value. I’ll be talking about this problem later when I present some data on forest products. However, the first round of the LSMS survey took place at a time when only the pilot village of Nong Boua Satit had been relocated, and therefore can give us some ideas about consumption just before resettlement began.