Venezuelans in Chile, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru: A development opportunity
Data and methods
Chile
Encuesta de Migración (telephone) and Encuesta Laboral (in person)
Colombia
Gran Encuesta Integrada de Hogares (in-person) and Pulso Migratorio, Round 4 (telephone)
Ecuador
Encuesta a Personas en Movilidad Humana y en Comunidades (in-person) and Encuesta de Fuerza y Poblacion (telephone)
Peru
Encuesta Nacional de Hogares (in-person) and Encuesta Nacional de Poblacion y Vivienda de Emergencia (in-person)
Methodology
Detailed socioeconomic profiles of Venezuelans and host communities were obtained from recent household surveys of both populations in each country. For Venezuelans, the report combines data from household, migration, and high-frequency surveys, collected mostly over the phone. For host communities (except Ecuador), official national household surveys conducted close in time to the other surveys were used; when feasible, the sample was restricted to areas where migrants are concentrated.
The methods and timing of the surveys were not identical across countries. For Ecuador, the surveys were administered simultaneously by phone. In Chile, the surveys were conducted close in time but through different methods (by phone for Venezuelans and face-to-face for hosts). In Colombia and Peru, the surveys of hosts were conducted a few months before the surveys of Venezuelans, in the context of a robust economic recovery, which may have resulted in less favorable labor outcomes for hosts. In Colombia, the survey of Venezuelans was conducted over the phone and the host survey in person. In Peru, both surveys were implemented in person. Phone surveys usually overrepresent educated and wealthier individuals.
Surveying hard-to-reach and vulnerable populations, such as refugees and migrants, is challenging and usually results in some data limitations, for several reasons. First, adequate sampling frames do not exist or are not updated regularly, making it difficult to draw a representative sample of the population. Second, surveys of migrants usually suffer from selection bias, as individuals who are irregular migrants are more likely to refuse to participate in the survey. Surveys therefore usually overrepresent regular migrants, who tend to be more educated, have higher living standards, and have better labor market outcomes than their irregular counterparts. Third, surveys of hard-to-reach and vulnerable populations may suffer from sensitivity bias, in which respondents avoid responding or provide untruthful answers to questions considered sensitive.