# **_An analysis based on UNS household surveys_**

This part is a summary of the results of the analysis conducted to determine the relationships between time and households consumption in Uganda<sup>12</sup> .

The first element to select was the type of market to evaluate. The survey had three main categories of markets, agricultural producers’ market, agricultural inputs market, and consumers market, with different types within each (most common, periodic, general, cooperative, and others). Upon examination there was a high correlation between agricultural producers’ and inputs markets; in 89 percent of the cases a community either had both or neither market, allowing evaluation of one market to be representative of both.<sup>13</sup> However, the design of the survey restricted evaluation of the time to markets. The survey asked local community members whether a certain type of market existed in their community. If they responded no, questions were then asked about where the closest market was located (distance, common mode of transport and time to the closest market). However, if the community answered yes, they did have that type of market in their community the surveyor moved on to the next type of market. The result of this questioning limited the evaluation as there did not exist data for those living with the type of market in their community.<sup>1415</sup> Figure 1 provides a picture of what does occur.

12 The study utilized the Uganda National Household survey from 2005/06 that was performed by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS). Two elements from this surveyed were drawn on, the household socio-economic portion, containing 7,426 households, and the community level portion, administered in 706 communities. The first steps were to determine the proper measure of consumption and which markets to measure, as they were multiple options for each (see annex 2 for definitions). Note that consumption (and not income) was used because income may be more difficult to accurately measure than consumption. Various consumption measures were provided in this survey, food and beverage consumption over the past 7 days, non-durable goods and services consumption over the last 30 days, semi-durable goods over the past 365 days, and a measure of consumption expenditure per adult. The decision was made to employ the food and beverage consumption measure as it had the shortest recall period and was representative of the overall households’ consumption.

> 13 A similar correlation was found between producers’ and consumers’ markets, as well as inputs and consumers’ markets.

> 14 The goal of this exercise is to determine the breaking point in which distance affects significantly income. If a household lives close to a market, we assume that the walking distance is low and no variation in income will be found.

> 15 In addition, there were inconsistencies in the data, with communities reporting time and distances that did not seem sensible. Some communities reported being 0 kilometers from the markets, but took them 1,000 minutes to arrive to the market, or it took on some communities 200 minutes to walk 20 kilometers, while it took 1,000 minutes for another community to walk the same distance. Though there is the possibility of differing terrain, there were also communities

19