# **_(2) Unit of data collection_**

Another consideration is the unit at which the intended destination of output is to be measured in household surveys. We compare two broad options for operationalizing the 19<sup>th</sup> ICLS – an activity-level operationalization and a product-level operationalization. In the first ( _activity-level_ ) approach, respondents are asked about the intended use of the output obtained from a household member’s activity in agriculture. An example of this approach would be the question “Are the products obtained from [NAME's] work in farming, livestock and fishing mainly intended for sale or for family use?”. The second ( _product-level_ ) approach would ask about the intended destination of output of each product produced by a member of the household; for example “Is this [CROP] mainly intended for sale or for family use?”<sup>11</sup> A possible third ( _cluster-level_ ) approach, would ask about the intended destination of output of each activity cluster (e.g. farming, livestock and fishing), an approach that is not explored in this paper. The activity-level approach is more suitable for surveys that typically do not collect production data, such as labor force and other nonagricultural surveys. For example, the model LFS questionnaire currently recommended by the ILO has adopted the activity-level approach.<sup>12</sup> Conversely, the product-level approach may be suitable for agricultural surveys that already collect crop-level data on agricultural production and disposition. However, since the 19<sup>th</sup> ICLS resolution requires the intended destination of output to be “established in reference to the specific goods produced”, crop-level reports on the intended use of output then need to be linked to individual-level labor data in order to establish whether a specific household member was employed during the reference period, which can be difficult in practice (more on this in section 4).

# **_(3) Aggregation across products_**

Most farmers in developing countries grow more than one crop and often also raise livestock. Since different agricultural products (-and by-products-) may differ in their level of commercialization, some form of aggregation is necessary in establishing whether the farmer’s overall output is intended only or mainly for sale. If the intention to sell is measured at the activity-level, this aggregation falls onto the respondent. Without further guidance on the part of the interviewer, it is unclear a priori how farmers perform such aggregation in their response. In addition, survey research shows that cognitively onerous questions can lead to bias in the data, especially among respondents with low levels of education (Arthi et al 2018; Gaddis et al, forthcoming). Conversely, if the intention to sell is measured at the product-level, aggregation is left to the analyst. Depending on how the data are collected, it may be possible to compute

> 11 In cases of mixed agriculture, livestock products and by-products also ought to be included, though such data are even more difficult to collect than crop-level data.

> 12 <u>https://ilo.org/LFSresources. Version 3 of ILO Model LFS Questionnaire (July 2019).</u>

9