Creating a 2000 IES-LFS Database in Stata

PROVIDE Project Technical Paper 2005:1

February 2005

Table 1: Percentage differences (employment and wages)

	IES 2000 No. of obs.	LFS 2000:2 No. of obs.	Percentage under- /overreported	Mean (inclabp) (IES 2o00)	Mean (w_inclabp) (LFS 2000:2)	Percentage under- /overreported
Legislators senior officials and managers	420,402	501,689	________19%	112,787	165,009	_______46%
Professionals_______________________________	449,222	481,781	________7%	102,199	125,365	_______23%
Technicians and associate professionals_____	905,578	988,889	________9%	_______62,146	_______56,831	_________-9%
Clerks______________________________________	893,638	960,147	________7%	_______39,350	_______85,415	_______117%
Service workers & shop market sales workers	1,038,507	1,289,362	_______24%	_______25,977	_______36,532	_______41%
Skilled agricultural and fishery workers______	340,695	428,772	_______26%	________16,751	________17,810	________6%
Craft and related trades workers_____________	1,225,808	1,445,966	________18%	_______25,852	_______43,746	_______69%
Plant and machine operators and assemblers	1,011,376	1,099,325	________9%	_______22,855	_______64,158	_______181%
Elementary occupations___________________	1,705,561	2,121,789	_______24%	_______13,442	_______33,358	_______148%
Domestic Workers______________________	923,499	981,741	________6%	________6,302	________6,258	_________-1%
Unspecified______________________________	737,041	_______22,946	________-97%	_______15,937	_______51,858	_______225%
Total_______________________________________	9,651,327	10,322,407	________7%	_______32,405	_______53,091	_______64%

Also reported in Figure 1 and Table 1 are employment figures reported in the IES and
LFS. The LFS reports higher employment figures for almost all occupation groups. The
patterns of employment in the LFS and IES are, however, similar. The unspecified category
shows the largest difference. This is probably due to the fact that the LFS uses two separate
questions to determine the occupation code, while the IES has only one question. Table 2 is a
cross-tabulation of the two occupation code variables. Only 45 persons report their
occupation code as ‘unspecified’ in the LFS, compared to the 1,798 unspecified workers in
the IES. Many of these workers (1,253) reported no income in the LFS, which is why they are
classified as ‘not applicable’ in the LFS.

As for the remainder of the occupation codes there is a fairly high correlation between the
LFS and IES. In Table 2 those observations on the diagonal of the cross-tabulation show
those persons who report the same occupation code in both the LFS and the IES. The
percentage ‘correctly categorised’ observations is fairly high. The ‘correctly categorised’ row
is defined as the number of observations on the diagonal divided by the column total (IES
number of observations), while the column is defined as the number of observations on the
diagonal divided by the row total (LFS number of observations). Section 4.2.4 continues the
discussion of the new employment figures that are used together with inclabp_new and
inclabp_old.

More intriguing information

1. Sector Switching: An Unexplored Dimension of Firm Dynamics in Developing Countries
2. A Note on Costly Sequential Search and Oligopoly Pricing (new title: Truly Costly Sequential Search and Oligopolistic Pricing,)
3. Ahorro y crecimiento: alguna evidencia para la economía argentina, 1970-2004
4. Declining Discount Rates: Evidence from the UK
5. The name is absent
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. Literary criticism as such can perhaps be called the art of rereading.
9. The name is absent
10. A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON UNDERINVESTMENT IN AGRICULTURAL R&D