Publication: Papua New Guinea High Frequency Phone Survey on COVID-19: Results from Round 1
Loading...
Date
2020-08-06
ISSN
Published
2020-08-06
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Papua New Guinea (PNG) is the largest country in the Pacific region, and one of the most diverse countries in the world. The key development challenge in this lower-middle income country is how to translate macroeconomic gains from the resource sector into better opportunities and services for PNG’s largely poor and rural populations. The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has compounded issues for an already weakening economic situation. A strong evidence base is needed to understand the socioeconomic implications of the coronavirus pandemic for Papua New Guinea. Data is needed to inform the policy response to the coronavirus crisis. To monitor and assess the socio-economic impacts of Coronavirus (COVID-19) in Papua New Guinea, five rounds of High Frequency Phone Surveys (HFPS) have been planned and will be conducted quarterly. Data collection began in late June 2020. This report presents the findings from round one and concludes with a policy section to help inform an evidence-based response to Coronavirus (COVID-19) in Papua New Guinea.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“World Bank. 2020. Papua New Guinea High Frequency Phone Survey on COVID-19: Results from Round 1. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/34907 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Papua New Guinea High Frequency Phone Survey on COVID-19, December 2020 to January 2021(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021)This joint report by the World Bank and United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) Papua New Guinea (PNG) presents the findings from two mobile phone surveys conducted in December 2020 and January 2021 in PNG. The World Bank survey, conducted in December 2020, was the second in a series. The UNICEF survey, conducted in January 2021, targeted re-contacting all 2,534 households from the World Bank round 2 survey with children under the age of 15, and achieved a final sample of 2,449. These results were also weighted using information from the demographic and health survey (DHS) to develop representative estimates for households with children under 15, 79.8 percent according to the DHS. The UNICEF survey included sections on household impacts as well as on the children living within the household. Compared to the rest of the country, markedly higher shares of respondents in the NCD noted deteriorations since June in situations related to theft, alcohol, and drug abuse, intimidation by police, violence by police, and domestic abuse, as well as higher declines in overall community trust, which can be an indicator of rising tensions. In addition, there were potential warning signs of the impacts of the prolonged crisis on children, with more than one-third of children exhibiting negative behavioral changes in the previous 15 days - though again a lack of baseline data limits the ability to establish a causal link specifically with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Publication Solomon Islands High Frequency Phone Survey on COVID-19(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-10-30)The Solomon Islands is a lower middle income small island state in the Melanesian region of the Southwest Pacific. Agriculture, including logging, is central to the economy of the Solomon Islands. To protect the country from importation of Coronavirus (COVID-19) and to limit the possible spread of undiagnosed cases, beginning March 27, the government enacted a series of emergency measures under the State of Public Emergency (SoPE). Coronavirus (COVID-19) response measures, both domestically and abroad, are expected to have negative impacts on the economy and on livelihoods. A strong evidence base is needed to understand the socioeconomic implications of the coronavirus pandemic for the Solomon Islands. The objective of this survey was to measure the socioeconomic impacts of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) global pandemic in the Solomon Islands, including livelihoods, food security, and public safety and security, through a high frequency mobile phone survey.Publication 2021 LAC High Frequency Phone Surveys(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2022-04)The World Bank and UNDP conducted a multi-wave High-Frequency Phone Survey (HFPS) in 2021 to assess the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the welfare of Latin American and Caribbean households. The first wave was collected between May and July 2021, and the data is nationally representative for 24 countries: Antigua & Barbuda, Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Lucia and Uruguay. he HFPS provides information on the welfare impacts that households experienced with respect to food insecurity, changes in employment, income changes, access to health and education services, and coping mechanisms.Publication COVID-19 High Frequency Phone Surveys in Latin America(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021-09)The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) high-frequency phone survey (HFPS) 2020 was conducted in 13 Latin American countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, and Peru. It followed a panel sample over three waves of data collection in 12 countries and over four waves in Ecuador. All waves spanned from May to August 2020 and each wave’s collection period lasted about ten days on average. The survey was administered to one adult per household. Each respondent was presented with both individual and household-level questions. All national samples were based on a dual frame of cell and landline phones, and selected as a one-stage probability sample, with geographic stratification of landline numbers. The samples were generated through a random digit dialing (RDD) process covering all cell and landline telephone numbers active at the time of the sample selection. Survey estimates represent households with a landline or at least one cell phone and individuals of 18 years of age or above who have an active cell phone number or a landline at home.Publication Rapid Information from Household High-Frequency Survey(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-12-08)The brief presents the main findings from the fourth of eight rounds of a nationally representative survey of 1,500 randomly selected households in all states/regions of Myanmar. The survey was undertaken by conducting a 20-minute phone call with respondents from 7th to 29th October 2020.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Measuring Financial Inclusion : The Global Findex Database(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-04)This paper provides the first analysis of the Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) Database, a new set of indicators that measure how adults in 148 economies save, borrow, make payments, and manage risk. The data show that 50 percent of adults worldwide have an account at a formal financial institution, though account penetration varies widely across regions, income groups and individual characteristics. In addition, 22 percent of adults report having saved at a formal financial institution in the past 12 months, and 9 percent report having taken out a new loan from a bank, credit union or microfinance institution in the past year. Although half of adults around the world remain unbanked, at least 35 percent of them report barriers to account use that might be addressed by public policy. Among the most commonly reported barriers are high cost, physical distance, and lack of proper documentation, though there are significant differences across regions and individual characteristics.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.