An increase in height between generations (in a stable population without significant in- or out-migration) is associated with better welfare conditions (McKee and Todd, 2011). This paper analyzes absolute intergenerational mobility (change of height between generations) and relative intergenerational mobility, defined as the degree to which parental height does _not_ predict the height of children.

# **V. Data**

We use the Evaluation of Rural Households Survey (ENCEL) 2017. ENCEL 2017 collected data on youth, heads of household,<sup>9</sup> and characteristics of both the individual’s household of origin and his/her new household.<sup>10</sup> Additionally, data from the Socioeconomic Characteristics of the Households Survey (ENCASEH) 1997 as well as the 1998 to 2000 ENCEL longitudinal surveys were used. ENCEL 2017 was established as a follow-up to a subsample of individuals from the 1997-2000 ENCASEH, to analyze elements of social mobility. Individuals who were in critical periods of growth and development when the program initiated were selected: those who could have received PROSPERA transfers during the first 1,000 days of life (under two years old), those who were about to start primary education (6 to 8 years old), or those who were transitioning to middle school (enrolled in the sixth grade). Measurements of intergenerational mobility are based on the comparisons of results between these youth and the people who, when the youth were 14 years old, were the primary household providers (hereafter referred to as ‘the providers’).

The sample was drawn from individuals in the three age categories identified from prior evaluation surveys and administrative registers.<sup>11</sup> The procedure ENCEL 2017 followed consisted of initially visiting the selected young adult’s households of origin, that is, the households they resided in between 1997 and 2000. When the original household was located, a survey was administered that collected data on: housing characteristics, household composition, each of the original household’s members, and each new resident.

Additionally, we requested the young adult’s location and the location of the person who contributed the most to household income (the provider) when the young adult was 14 years old. If the young adult and/or provider remained in the original household, they were interviewed with specific individual questionnaires. If they were no longer part of the original household, a followup was carried out if they resided in: the same village, in villages within a maximum half hour travel radius from the village of origin, in villages within the survey’s working routes, in the main cities of the 7 regions in the sample, or in the main metropolitan areas of the country.

ENCEL 2017 was carried out in November and December of 2017. Eleven thousand youth were selected and 4,663 (42.2%) were interviewed. Of the non-interviewed, the majority were youth who were not living in their original household (24%), followed by those who were not found (14%), and by those who were reported as migrants (11%). To increase the sample size, a second interview phase was carried out in 2018, during which 1,582 additional youth were interviewed.

> 9 In ENCEL 2017 “provider” was defined as someone who provided the greater part of the household’s expenditure when the young adult was 14 years old; typically, the father or the mother.

> 10 In ENCEL 2017 “new household” was defined as the household created by a selected young adult.

> 11 The detailed methodology of the ENCEL 2017 is presented in the specific document of the National Institute of Public Health (INSP) 2017.

14