Serbia - Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey - 2010

Publication date: 2010

PublisherPublisher UNICEF BelgradeUNICEF Belgrade For publisherFor publisher Judita ReichenbergJudita Reichenberg Area RepresentativeArea Representative ProofreadingProofreading Kevin ByrneKevin Byrne DesignDesign Rastko ToholjRastko Toholj Cover photoCover photo UNICEF Serbia/Tomislav PeternekUNICEF Serbia/Tomislav Peternek Printed byPrinted by Radunić, BelgradeRadunić, Belgrade Print run 300Print run 300 ISBN 978-86-82471-90-5ISBN 978-86-82471-90-5 Published in December, 2011Published in December, 2011 The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) in Serbia was carried out in 2010 by the Statistical The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) in Serbia was carried out in 2010 by the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. Financial and technical support was provided by the United Office of the Republic of Serbia. Financial and technical support was provided by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). MICS is an international household survey programme developed by UNICEF. The Republic of MICS is an international household survey programme developed by UNICEF. The Republic of Serbia MICS was conducted as part of the fourth global round of MICS surveys (MICS4). MICS Serbia MICS was conducted as part of the fourth global round of MICS surveys (MICS4). MICS provides up-to-date information on the situation of children and women and measures key provides up-to-date information on the situation of children and women and measures key indicators that allow countries to monitor progress towards the Millennium Development Goals indicators that allow countries to monitor progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and other internationally agreed upon commitments. Additional information on the (MDGs) and other internationally agreed upon commitments. Additional information on the global MICS project may be obtained from www.childinfo.org. global MICS project may be obtained from www.childinfo.org. Suggested citationSuggested citation Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2011. Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2010, Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2011. Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2010, Belgrade, Republic of Serbia: Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia.Belgrade, Republic of Serbia: Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. AAcknowledgementscknowledgements A number of people contributed to the development of this survey and report with their professional knowledge, A number of people contributed to the development of this survey and report with their professional knowledge, personal enthusiasm and commitment to ensure a better life for all children in Serbia.personal enthusiasm and commitment to ensure a better life for all children in Serbia. As in previous MICS rounds, the survey concept, including improvements and innovations, was created and led by As in previous MICS rounds, the survey concept, including improvements and innovations, was created and led by UNICEF’s Global MICS team. Ivana Bjelic and Turgay Unalan gave important technical support on data processing UNICEF’s Global MICS team. Ivana Bjelic and Turgay Unalan gave important technical support on data processing and analysis. Siraj Mahmudlu supported the process throughout and made constructive contributions to the draft and analysis. Siraj Mahmudlu supported the process throughout and made constructive contributions to the draft report. The Global MICS process was led by Attila Hancioglu, whose leadership, vast experience and endless patience, report. The Global MICS process was led by Attila Hancioglu, whose leadership, vast experience and endless patience, were of critical importance in overcoming challenges during the survey and the report generation. were of critical importance in overcoming challenges during the survey and the report generation. For the second time, the Director of the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia, Dragan Vukmirovic, committed For the second time, the Director of the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia, Dragan Vukmirovic, committed his institution to a partnership with UNICEF in implementing the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey in Serbia. his institution to a partnership with UNICEF in implementing the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey in Serbia. His team, ably led by Dragana Djokovic–Papic, demonstrated great knowledge, flexibility and enthusiasm. Mirjana His team, ably led by Dragana Djokovic–Papic, demonstrated great knowledge, flexibility and enthusiasm. Mirjana Ogrizovic–Brasanac meticulously coordinated the sampling, while Jovanka Stojanovic and Vladica Jankovic Ogrizovic–Brasanac meticulously coordinated the sampling, while Jovanka Stojanovic and Vladica Jankovic demonstrated commitment and professionalism in completing each phase of the survey with the highest possible demonstrated commitment and professionalism in completing each phase of the survey with the highest possible quality and in a timely manner. All the survey teams, including co-ordinators, field staff and data entry staff, carried quality and in a timely manner. All the survey teams, including co-ordinators, field staff and data entry staff, carried out their work diligently and efficiently.out their work diligently and efficiently. The UNICEF Serbia team, led by Judita Reichenberg and Lesley Miller, patiently provided their comments, expertise The UNICEF Serbia team, led by Judita Reichenberg and Lesley Miller, patiently provided their comments, expertise and support during all phases of the implementation of MICS4. Goran Milovanovic, as the MICS4 consultant, and support during all phases of the implementation of MICS4. Goran Milovanovic, as the MICS4 consultant, also provided significant assistance. Overall country-level coordination of the survey was competently managed by also provided significant assistance. Overall country-level coordination of the survey was competently managed by Aleksandra Jovic.Aleksandra Jovic. The support of line ministries and experts, through inputs to the questionnaire design and to the final report The support of line ministries and experts, through inputs to the questionnaire design and to the final report was very helpful. Particularly valuable was the support of the Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction Unit of the was very helpful. Particularly valuable was the support of the Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction Unit of the Government of Serbia, which participated in all stages of MICS4 as part of the Technical Committee. Government of Serbia, which participated in all stages of MICS4 as part of the Technical Committee. Finally, it must also be noted that the data collection would not have been possible without the individuals and Finally, it must also be noted that the data collection would not have been possible without the individuals and households of Serbia, including those living in Roma settlements, who generously opened their homes and gave their households of Serbia, including those living in Roma settlements, who generously opened their homes and gave their time to the realization of this survey.time to the realization of this survey. List of Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Summary Table of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1313 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1717 I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2323 BackgroundBackground. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2323 Survey ObjectivesSurvey Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2424 II SAMPLE AND SURVEY METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . 2525 Sample Design of the Serbia SampleSample Design of the Serbia Sample . . . . . . . . . . . 2525 Sample Design of the Roma Settlements SampleSample Design of the Roma Settlements Sample . . . . . . 2525 QuestionnairesQuestionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2626 Training and FieldworkTraining and Fieldwork. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2727 Data ProcessingData Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2727 The Report StructureThe Report Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2727 How to Read the TablesHow to Read the Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2828 IIIA SERBIA SAMPLE COVERAGE AND THE CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND RESPONDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2929 Sample CoverageSample Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2929 Characteristics of HouseholdsCharacteristics of Households . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3131 Characteristics of Female Respondents 15–49 YearsCharacteristics of Female Respondents 15–49 Years of Age, Male Respondents 15–29 Years of Age andof Age, Male Respondents 15–29 Years of Age and Children Under-5 Children Under-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3333 Children’s Living ArrangementsChildren’s Living Arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3737 IIIB ROMA SETTLEMENTS SAMPLE COVERAGE AND THE CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND RESPONDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3939 Sample CoverageSample Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3939 Characteristics of HouseholdsCharacteristics of Households . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4040 Characteristics of Female Respondents 15–49 YearsCharacteristics of Female Respondents 15–49 Years of Age, Male Respondents 15–29 Years of Age andof Age, Male Respondents 15–29 Years of Age and Children Under-5 Children Under-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4242 Children’s living arrangements in Roma SettlementsChildren’s living arrangements in Roma Settlements . . . . 4545 IV CHILD MORTALITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4747 V NUTRITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4949 Nutritional StatusNutritional Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4949 Breastfeeding and Infant and Young Child FeedingBreastfeeding and Infant and Young Child Feeding. . . . . 5656 Low Birth WeightLow Birth Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7070 VI CHILD HEALTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7272 Oral Rehydration TreatmentOral Rehydration Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7272 Care Seeking and Antibiotic Treatment of PneumoniaCare Seeking and Antibiotic Treatment of Pneumonia . . . 8282 Solid Fuel UseSolid Fuel Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8787 VII WATER AND SANITATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9191 Use of Improved Water SourcesUse of Improved Water Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9191 Use of Improved SanitationUse of Improved Sanitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100100 HandwashingHandwashing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108108 CONTENTSCONTENTS VIII REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112112FertilityFertility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112112Contraception Contraception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117117 Unmet NeedUnmet Need . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122122 Antenatal CareAntenatal Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126126 Assistance at DeliveryAssistance at Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132132 Place of DeliveryPlace of Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135135 IX CHILD DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137137 Early Childhood Education and LearningEarly Childhood Education and Learning . . . . . . . . 137137 Early Childhood Development Early Childhood Development . . . . . . . . . . . . 149149 X LITERACY AND EDUCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152152 Literacy among Young Women and MenLiteracy among Young Women and Men . . . . . . . . 152152 School ReadinessSchool Readiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155155 Primary and Secondary School ParticipationPrimary and Secondary School Participation . . . . . . 157157 XI CHILD PROTECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171171 Birth RegistrationBirth Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171171 Child Discipline Child Discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173173 Early Marriage Early Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176176 Attitudes toward Domestic ViolenceAttitudes toward Domestic Violence . . . . . . . . . . 185185 XII HIV/AIDS AND SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR . . . . . . . . . 190190 Knowledge about HIV TransmissionKnowledge about HIV Transmission and Misconceptions about HIV/AIDSand Misconceptions about HIV/AIDS . . . . . . . . . 190190 Accepting Attitudes toward PeopleAccepting Attitudes toward People Living with HIV/AIDS Living with HIV/AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203203 Knowledge of a Place for HIV Testing, CounsellingKnowledge of a Place for HIV Testing, Counselling and Testing during Antenatal Careand Testing during Antenatal Care . . . . . . . . . . . 208208 Sexual Behaviour Related to HIV Transmission Sexual Behaviour Related to HIV Transmission . . . . . 218218 XIII ACCESS TO MASS MEDIA AND USE OF INFORMATION/COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY . . . . . 234234 Access to Mass MediaAccess to Mass Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234234 Use of Information/Communication Technology Use of Information/Communication Technology . . . . 239239 XIV SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243243 APPENDICES Appendix A. Sample DesignAppendix A. Sample Design Sample Design for the Serbia SampleSample Design for the Serbia Sample . . . . . . . . . 257257 Sample Design for the Roma Settlements SampleSample Design for the Roma Settlements Sample . . . . 261261 Appendix B. List of Personnel Involved in the SurveyAppendix B. List of Personnel Involved in the Survey . . 264264 Appendix C. Estimates of Sampling ErrorsAppendix C. Estimates of Sampling Errors Estimates of Sampling Errors for the Serbia SampleEstimates of Sampling Errors for the Serbia Sample . . . 266266 Estimates of Sampling Errors for the RomaEstimates of Sampling Errors for the Roma Settlements SampleSettlements Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275275 Appendix D. Data Quality TablesAppendix D. Data Quality Tables Data Quality Tables — Serbia SampleData Quality Tables — Serbia Sample . . . . . . . . . 280280 Data Quality Tables — Roma Settlements SampleData Quality Tables — Roma Settlements Sample . . . 291291 Appendix E. MICS4 Indicators: NumeratorsAppendix E. MICS4 Indicators: Numerators and Denominatorsand Denominators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300300 Appendix F. QuestionnairesAppendix F. Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305305 Appendix G. ISCED TablesAppendix G. ISCED Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345345 30 Table HH.1 Results of household, women’s, men’s and under-5 interviews, Serbia, 2010 31 Table HH.2 Household age distribution by sex, Serbia, 2010 32 Table HH.3 Household composition, Serbia, 2010 34 Table HH.4 Women’s background characteristics, Serbia, 2010 35 Table HH.4M Men’s background characteristics, Serbia, 2010 36 Table HH.5 Under-5’s background characteristics, Serbia, 2010 37 Table HH.6 Children’s living arrangements and orphanhood, Serbia, 2010 39 Table HH.1R Results of household, women’s, men’s and under-5 interviews, Roma Settlements, 2010 40 Table HH.2R Household age distribution by sex, Roma Settlements, 2010 41 Table HH.3R Household composition, Roma Settlements, 2010 42 Table HH.4R Women’s background characteristics, Roma Settlements, 2010 43 Table HH.4R.M Men’s background characteristics, Roma Settlements, 2010 44 Table HH.5R Under-5’s background characteristics, Roma Settlements, 2010 45 Table HH.6R Children’s living arrangements and orphanhood, Roma Settlements, 2010 47 Table CM.1R Children ever born, children surviving and proportion dead, Roma Settlements, 2010 48 Table CM.2R Child mortality, Roma Settlements, 2010 50 Table NU.1 Nutritional status of children, Serbia, 2010 52 Table NU.1 (a) Nutritional status of children (based on NCHS/CDC/WHO International Reference Population), Serbia, 2010 53 Table NU.1R Nutritional status of children, Roma Settlements, 2010 55 Table NU.1R (a) Nutritional status of children (based on NCHS/CDC/WHO International Reference Population), Roma Settlements, 2010 56 Table NU.2 Initial breastfeeding, Serbia, 2010 57 Table NU.3 Breastfeeding, Serbia, 2010 59 Table NU.4 Duration of breastfeeding, Serbia, 2010 60 Table NU.5 Age-appropriate breastfeeding, Serbia, 2010 61 Table NU.6 Introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft foods, Serbia, 2010 62 Table NU.7 Minimum meal frequency, Serbia, 2010 63 Table NU.8 Bottle feeding, Serbia, 2010 64 Table NU.2R Initial breastfeeding, Roma Settlements, 2010 65 Table NU.3R Breastfeeding, Roma Settlements, 2010 66 Table NU.4R Duration of breastfeeding, Roma Settlements, 2010 67 Table NU.5R Age-appropriate breastfeeding, Roma Settlements, 2010 68 Table NU.6R Introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft foods, Roma Settlements, 2010 68 Table NU.7R Minimum meal frequency, Roma Settlements, 2010 List of TablesList of Tables 69 Table NU.8R Bottle feeding, Roma Settlements, 2010 70 Table NU.9 Low birth weight infants, Serbia, 2010 71 Table NU.9R Low birth weight infants, Roma Settlements, 2010 73 Table CH.1 Oral rehydration solutions and recommended homemade fluids, Serbia, 2010 74-75 Table CH.2 Feeding practices during diarrhoea, Serbia, 2010 76-77 Table CH.3 Oral rehydration therapy with continued feeding and other treatments, Serbia, 2010 78 Table CH.1R Oral rehydration solutions and recommended homemade fluids, Roma Settlements, 2010 79 Table CH.2R Feeding practices during diarrhoea, Roma Settlements, 2010 80-81 Table CH.3R Oral rehydration therapy with continued feeding and other treatments, Roma Settlements, 2010 82-83 Table CH.4 Care seeking for suspected pneumonia and antibiotic use during suspected pneumonia, Serbia, 2010 84 Table CH.5 Knowledge of the two danger signs of pneumonia, Serbia, 2010 85 Table CH.4R Care seeking for suspected pneumonia and antibiotic use during suspected pneumonia, Roma Settlements, 2010 86 Table CH.5R Knowledge of the two danger signs of pneumonia, Roma Settlements, 2010 87 Table CH.6 Solid fuel use, Serbia, 2010 88 Table CH.7 Solid fuel use by place of cooking, Serbia, 2010 89 Table CH.6R Solid fuel use, Roma Settlements, 2010 90 Table CH.7R Solid fuel use by place of cooking, Roma Settlements, 2010 92-93 Table WS.1 Use of improved water sources, Serbia, 2010 92-93 Table WS.2 Household water treatment, Serbia, 2010 94 Table WS.3 Time to source of drinking water, Serbia, 2010 95 Table WS.4 Person collecting water, Serbia, 2010 96-97 Table WS.1R Use of improved water sources, Roma Settlements, 2010 97 Table WS.2R Household water treatment, Roma Settlements, 2010 98 Table WS.3R Time to source of drinking water, Roma Settlements, 2010 99 Table WS.4R Person collecting water, Roma Settlements, 2010 100 Table WS.5 Types of sanitation facilities, Serbia, 2010 101 Table WS.6 Use and sharing of sanitation facilities, Serbia, 2010 102 Table WS.7 Disposal of child’s faeces, Serbia, 2010 103 Table WS.8 Drinking water and sanitation ladders, Serbia, 2010 104 Table WS.5R Types of sanitation facilities, Roma Settlements, 2010 105 Table WS.6R Use and sharing of sanitation facilities, Roma Settlements, 2010 106 Table WS.7R Disposal of child’s faeces, Roma Settlements, 2010 107 Table WS.8R Drinking water and sanitation ladders, Roma Settlements, 2010 108 Table WS.9 Water and soap at place for handwashing, Serbia, 2010 109 Table WS.10 Availability of soap, Serbia, 2010 110 Table WS.9R Water and soap at place for handwashing, Roma Settlements, 2010 111 Table WS.10R Availability of soap, Roma Settlements, 2010 112 Table RH.1 Adolescent birth rate and total fertility rate, Serbia, 2010 113 Table RH.2 Early childbearing, Serbia, 2010 114 Table RH.3 Trends in early childbearing, Serbia, 2010 115 Table RH.1R Adolescent birth rate and total fertility rate, Roma Settlements, 2010 115 Table RH.2R Early childbearing, Roma Settlements, 2010 116 Table RH.3R Trends in early childbearing, Roma Settlements, 2010 118-119 Table RH.4 Use of contraception, Serbia, 2010 120-121 Table RH.4R Use of contraception, Roma Settlements, 2010 123 Table RH.5 Unmet need for contraception, Serbia, 2010 124 Table RH.5R Unmet need for contraception, Roma Settlements, 2010 126 Table RH.6 Antenatal care coverage, Serbia, 2010 127 Table RH.7 Number of antenatal care visits, Serbia, 2010 128 Table RH.8 Content of antenatal care, Serbia, 2010 129 Table RH.6R Antenatal care coverage, Roma Settlements, 2010 130 Table RH.7R Number of antenatal care visits, Roma Settlements, 2010 131 Table RH.8R Content of antenatal care, Roma Settlements, 2010 132 Table RH.9 Assistance during delivery, Serbia, 2010 134 Table RH.9R Assistance during delivery, Roma Settlements, 2010 135 Table RH.10 Place of delivery, Serbia, 2010 136 Table RH.10R Place of delivery, Roma Settlements, 2010 137 Table CD.1 Early childhood education, Serbia, 2010 138-139 Table CD.1A Early child development, Serbia, 2010 140 Table CD.2 Support for learning, Serbia, 2010 141 Table CD.3 Learning materials, Serbia, 2010 142 Table CD.4 Inadequate care, Serbia, 2010 143 Table CD.1R Early childhood education, Roma Settlements, 2010 144-145 Table CD.1R.A Early child development, Roma Settlements, 2010 146 Table CD.2R Support for learning, Roma Settlements, 2010 147 Table CD.3R Learning materials, Roma Settlements, 2010 148 Table CD.4R Inadequate care, Roma Settlements, 2010 150 Table CD.5 Early child development index, Serbia, 2010 151 Table CD.5R Early child development index, Roma Settlements, 2010 152 Table ED.1 Literacy among young women, Serbia, 2010 153 Table ED.1M Literacy among young men, Serbia, 2010 154 Table ED.1R Literacy among young women, Roma Settlements, 2010 154 Table ED.1R.M Literacy among young men, Roma Settlements, 2010 155 Table ED.2 School readiness, Serbia, 2010 156 Table ED.2R School readiness, Roma Settlements, 2010 157 Table ED.3 Primary school entry, Serbia, 2010 158 Table ED.4 Primary school attendance, Serbia, 2010 159 Table ED.5 Secondary school attendance, Serbia, 2010 160 Table ED.6 Children reaching last grade of primary school, Serbia, 2010 161 Table ED.7 Primary school completion and transition to secondary school, Serbia, 2010 162 Table ED.7A Net primary school completion and transition to secondary school, Serbia, 2010 163 Table ED.8 Education gender parity, Serbia, 2010 164 Table ED.3R Primary school entry, Roma Settlements, 2010 165 Table ED.4R Primary school attendance, Roma Settlements, 2010 166 Table ED.5R Secondary school attendance, Roma Settlements, 2010 167 Table ED.6R Children reaching last grade of primary school, Roma Settlements, 2010 168 Table ED.7R Primary school completion and transition to secondary school, Roma Settlements, 2010 169 Table ED.7RA Net primary school completion and transition to secondary school, Roma Settlements, 2010 170 Table ED.8R Education gender parity, Roma Settlements, 2010 171 Table CP.1 Birth registration, Serbia, 2010 172 Table CP.1R Birth registration, Roma Settlements, 2010 173 Table CP.2 Child discipline, Serbia, 2010 175 Table CP.2R Child discipline, Roma Settlements, 2010 177 Table CP.3 Early marriage, Serbia, 2010 178 Table CP.3M Early marriage, Serbia, 2010 179 Table CP.4 Trends in early marriage, Serbia, 2010 179 Table CP.4M Trends in early marriage, Serbia, 2010 180 Table CP.5 Spousal age difference, Serbia, 2010 181 Table CP.3R Early marriage, Roma Settlements, 2010 182 Table CP.3R.M Early marriage, Roma Settlements, 2010 183 Table CP.4R Trends in early marriage, Roma Settlements, 2010 183 Table CP.4R.M Trends in early marriage, Roma Settlements, 2010 184 Table CP.5R Spousal age difference, Roma Settlements, 2010 186 Table CP.6 Attitudes toward domestic violence, Serbia, 2010 187 Table CP.6M Attitudes toward domestic violence, Serbia, 2010 188 Table CP.6R Attitudes toward domestic violence, Roma Settlements, 2010 189 Table CP.6R.M Attitudes toward domestic violence, Roma Settlements, 2010 190-191 Table HA.1 Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission, Serbia, 2010 192 Table HA.1M Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission, Serbia, 2010 193 Table HA.2 Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission among young women, Serbia, 2010 194 Table HA.2M Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission among young men, Serbia, 2010 196 Table HA.3 Knowledge of mother-to-child HIV transmission, Serbia, 2010 197 Table HA.1R Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission, Roma Settlements, 2010 198-199 Table HA.1R.M Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission, Roma Settlements, 2010 198-199 Table HA.2R Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission among young women, Roma Settlements, 2010 200-201 Table HA.2R.M Knowledge about HIV transmission, misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, and comprehensive knowledge about HIV transmission among young men, Roma Settlements, 2010 202 Table HA.3R Knowledge of mother-to-child HIV transmission, Roma Settlements, 2010 203 Table HA.4 Accepting attitudes toward people living with HIV/AIDS, Serbia, 2010 204 Table HA.4M Accepting attitudes toward people living with HIV/AIDS, Serbia, 2010 206 Table HA.4R Accepting attitudes toward people living with HIV/AIDS, Roma Settlements, 2010 207 Table HA.4R.M Accepting attitudes toward people living with HIV/AIDS, Roma Settlements, 2010 208 Table HA.5 Knowledge of a place for HIV testing, Serbia, 2010 209 Table HA.5M Knowledge of a place for HIV testing, Serbia, 2010 210 Table HA.6 Knowledge of a place for HIV testing among sexually active young women, Serbia, 2010 211 Table HA.6M Knowledge of a place for HIV testing among sexually active young men, Serbia, 2010 212 Table HA.7 HIV counselling and testing during antenatal care, Serbia, 2010 213 Table HA.5R Knowledge of a place for HIV testing, Roma Settlements, 2010 214 Table HA.5R.M Knowledge of a place for HIV testing, Roma Settlements, 2010 215 Table HA.6R Knowledge of a place for HIV testing among sexually active young women, Roma Settlements, 2010 216 Table HA.6R.M Knowledge of a place for HIV testing among sexually active young men, Roma Settlements, 2010 217 Table HA.7R HIV counselling and testing during antenatal care, Roma Settlements, 2010 218 Table HA.8 Sexual behaviour that increases the risk of HIV infection, Serbia, 2010 219 Table HA.8M Sexual behaviour that increases the risk of HIV infection, Serbia, 2010 220 Table HA.9 Sex with multiple partners, Serbia, 2010 221 Table HA.10 Sex with multiple partners among young women, Serbia, 2010 222 Table HA.9M Sex with multiple partners, Serbia, 2010 223 Table HA.10M Sex with multiple partners among young men, Serbia, 2010 224 Table HA.11 Sex with non-regular partners, Serbia, 2010 225 Table HA.11M Sex with non-regular partners, Serbia, 2010 226 Table HA.8R Sexual behaviour that increases the risk of HIV infection, Roma Settlements, 2010 227 Table HA.8R.M Sexual behaviour that increases the risk of HIV infection, Roma Settlements, 2010 228 Table HA.9R Sex with multiple partners, Roma Settlements, 2010 229 Table HA.10R Sex with multiple partners among young women, Roma Settlements, 2010 230 Table HA.9R.M Sex with multiple partners, Roma Settlements, 2010 231 Table HA.10R.M Sex with multiple partners among young men, Roma Settlements, 2010 232 Table HA.11R Sex with non-regular partners, Roma Settlements, 2010 233 Table HA.11R.M Sex with non-regular partners, Roma Settlements, 2010 235 Table MT.1 Exposure to mass media, Serbia, 2010 236 Table MT.1M Exposure to mass media, Serbia, 2010 237 Table MT.1R Exposure to mass media, Roma Settlements, 2010 238 Table MT.1R.M Exposure to mass media, Roma Settlements, 2010 239 Table MT.2 Use of computers and internet, Serbia, 2010 240 Table MT.2M Use of computers and internet, Serbia, 2010 241 Table MT.2R Use of computers and internet, Roma Settlements, 2010 242 Table MT.2R.M Use of computers and internet, Roma Settlements, 2010 244 Table SW.1 Domains of life satisfaction, Serbia, 2010 245 Table SW.1M Domains of life satisfaction, Serbia, 2010 246 Table SW.2 Life satisfaction and happiness, Serbia, 2010 247 Table SW.2M Life satisfaction and happiness, Serbia, 2010 248 Table SW.3 Perception of a better life, Serbia, 2010 249 Table SW.3M Perception of a better life, Serbia, 2010 250 Table SW.1R Domains of life satisfaction, Roma Settlements, 2010 251 Table SW.1R.M Domains of life satisfaction, Roma Settlements, 2010 252 Table SW.2R Life satisfaction and happiness, Roma Settlements, 2010 253 Table SW.2R.M Life satisfaction and happiness, Roma Settlements, 2010 254 Table SW.3R Perception of a better life, Roma Settlements, 2010 254 Table SW.3R.M Perception of a better life, Roma Settlements, 2010 APPENDICES 258 Table SD.1 Allocation of Sample Clusters (Primary Sampling Units) to Sampling Strata 262 Table SD.1R Allocation of Sample Clusters (Primary Sampling Units) to Sampling Strata 267 Table SE.1 Indicators selected for sampling error calculations, Serbia, 2010 268 Table SE.2 Sampling errors: Total sample, Serbia, 2010 269 Table SE.3 Sampling errors: Urban areas, Serbia, 2010 270 Table SE.4 Sampling errors: Rural areas, Serbia, 2010 271 Table SE.5 Sampling errors: Region 1 — Belgrade, Serbia, 2010 272 Table SE.6 Sampling errors: Region 2 — Vojvodina, Serbia, 2010 273 Table SE.7 Sampling errors: Region 3 — Sumadija and Western Serbia, Serbia, 2010 274 Table SE.8 Sampling errors: Region 4 — Southern and Eastern Serbia, Serbia, 2010 276 Table SE.1R Indicators selected for sampling error calculations, Roma Settlements, 2010 277 Table SE.2R Sampling errors: Total sample, Roma Settlements, 2010 278 Table SE.3R Sampling errors: Urban areas, Roma Settlements, 2010 279 Table SE.4R Sampling errors: Rural areas, Roma Settlements, 2010 280 Table DQ.1 Age distribution of household population, Serbia, 2010 281 Table DQ.2 Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women, Serbia, 2010 281 Table DQ.3 Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men, Serbia, 2010 281 Table DQ.4 Age distribution of under-5s in household and under-5 questionnaires, Serbia, 2010 282 Table DQ.5 Women’s completion rates by socio-economic characteristics of households, Serbia, 2010 283 Table DQ.6 Men’s completion rates by socio- economic characteristics of households, Serbia, 2010 284 Table DQ.7 Completion rates for under-5 questionnaires by socio-economic characteristics of households, Serbia, 2010 285 Table DQ.8 Completeness of reporting, Serbia, 2010 286 Table DQ.9 Completeness of information for anthropometric indicators, Serbia, Serbia, 2010 287 Table DQ.10 Heaping in anthropometric measurements, Serbia, 2010 287 Table DQ.11 Observation of places for hand washing, Serbia, 2010 288 Table DQ.12 Observation of under-5s birth certificates, Serbia, 2010 288 Table DQ.13 Presence of mother in the household and the person interviewed for the under-5 questionnaire, Serbia, 2010 289 Table DQ.14 Selection of children age 2–14 years for the child discipline module, Serbia, 2010 289 Table DQ.15 School attendance by single age, Serbia, 2010 290 Table DQ.16 Sex ratio at birth among children ever born and living, Serbia, 2010 291 Table DQ.1R Age distribution of household population, Roma Settlements, 2010 292 Table DQ.2R Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women, Roma Settlements, 2010 292 Table DQ.3R Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men, Roma Settlements, 2010 292 Table DQ.4R Age distribution of under-5s in household and under-5 questionnaires, Roma Settlements, 2010 293 Table DQ.5R Women’s completion rates by socio-economic characteristics of households, Roma Settlements, 2010 293 Table DQ.6R Men’s completion rates by socio- economic characteristics of households, Roma Settlements, 2010 294 Table DQ.7R Completion rates for under-5 questionnaires by socio-economic characteristics of households, Roma Settlements, 2010 295 Table DQ.8R Completeness of reporting, Roma Settlements, 2010 296 Table DQ.9R Completeness of information for anthropometric indicators, Roma Settlements, 2010 297 Table DQ.10R Heaping in anthropometric measurements, Roma Settlements, 2010 297 Table DQ.11R Observation of places for hand washing, Roma Settlements, 2010 297 Table DQ.12R Observation of under-5s birth certificates, Roma Settlements, 2010 298 Table DQ.13R Presence of mother in the household and the person interviewed for the under-5 questionnaire, Roma Settlements, 2010 298 Table DQ.14R Selection of children age 2–14 years for the child discipline module, Roma Settlements, 2010 299 Table DQ.15R School attendance by single age, Roma Settlements, 2010 299 Table DQ.16R Sex ratio at birth among children ever born and living, Roma Settlements, 2010 345 Table ED.4 (a) Primary school attendance, Serbia, 2010 346 Table ED.5 (a) Lower secondary school attendance, Serbia, 2010 347 Table ED.5 (b) Upper secondary school attendance, Serbia, 2010 348 Table ED.4R (a) Primary school attendance, Roma Settlements, 2010 349 Table ED.5R (a) Lower secondary school attendance, Roma Settlements, 2010 350 Table ED.5R (b) Upper secondary school attendance, Roma Settlements, 2010 32 Figure HH.1 Age and sex distribution of household population, Serbia, 2010 41 Figure HH.1R Age and sex distribution of household population, Roma settlements, 2010 48 Figure CM.1R Under-5 mortality rates by background characteristics, Roma settlements, 2010 51 Figure NU.1 Percentage of children under age 5 who are underweight, stunted and wasted, Serbia, 2010 54 Figure NU.1R Percentage of children under age 5 who are underweight, stunted and wasted, Roma settlements, 2010 57 Figure NU.2 Percentage of mothers who started breastfeeding within one hour and within one day of birth, Serbia, 2010 58 Figure NU.3 Percent distribution of children under age 2 by feeding pattern by age group, Serbia, 2010 65 Figure NU.2R Percentage of mothers who started breastfeeding within one hour and within one day of birth, Roma settlements, 2010 List of FiguresList of Figures 66 Figure NU.3R Percent distribution of children under age 2 by feeding pattern by age group, Roma settlements, 2010 70 Figure NU.4 Percentage of infants weighing less than 2500 grams at birth by wealth index, Serbia, 2010 71 Figure NU.4R Percentage of infants weighing less than 2500 grams at birth by wealth index, Roma settlements, 2010 74 Figure CH.1 Percentage of children under age 5 with diarrhoea who received oral rehydration treatment, Serbia, 2010 77 Figure CH.2 Percentage of children under age 5 with diarrhoea who received ORT or increased fluids, AND continued feeding, Serbia, 2010 79 Figure CH.1R Percentage of children under age 5 with diarrhoea who received oral rehydration treatment, Roma settlements, 2010 81 Figure CH.2R Percentage of children under age 5 with diarrhoea who received ORT or increased fluids, AND continued feeding, Roma settlements, 2010 91 Figure WS.1 Percent distribution of household members by source of drinking water, Serbia, 2010 96 Figure WS.1R Percent distribution of household members by source of drinking water, Roma settlements, 2010 195 Figure HA.1 Percentage of women who have comprehensive knowledge of HIV/AIDS transmission, Serbia, 2010 200 Figure HA.1R Percentage of women who have comprehensive knowledge of HIV/AIDS transmission, Roma settlements, 2010 221 Figure HA.2 Sexual behaviour that increases risk of HIV infection, Serbia, 2010 227 Figure HA.2R Sexual behaviour that increases risk of HIV infection, Roma settlements, 2010 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 11 List of Abbreviations AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome ANC Antenatal Care Antenatal Care CSPro Census and Survey Processing System Census and Survey Processing System ECDI Early Child Development Index Early Child Development Index EU European Union European Union GPI Gender Parity Index Gender Parity Index HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus Human Immunodeficiency Virus ICT Information/Communication Technology Information/Communication Technology IMR Infant Mortality rate Infant Mortality rate IUD Intrauterine Device Intrauterine Device JMP Joint Monitoring Programme Joint Monitoring Programme LAM Lactational Amenorrhea Method Lactational Amenorrhea Method MDG Millennium Development Goals Millennium Development Goals MICS Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey NAR Net Attendance Rate Net Attendance Rate NCHS National Center for Health StatisticsNational Center for Health Statistics ORS Oral Rehydration Salts Oral Rehydration Salts ORT Oral rehydration treatment Oral rehydration treatment PPP Preparatory Preschool Programme Preparatory Preschool Programme PSU Primary Sampling Unit Primary Sampling Unit RHF Recommended Home Fluid Recommended Home Fluid SORS Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences Statistical Package for Social Sciences TFR Total fertility rate Total fertility rate U5MR Under-five mortality rate Under-five mortality rate UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework United Nations Development Assistance Framework UNGASS United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund United Nations Children’s Fund WHO World Health Organization World Health Organization MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 13 Summary Table of FindingsSummary Table of Findings Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and Millennium Development Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Indicators, Serbia, 2010Goals (MDG) Indicators, Serbia, 2010 Topic MICS4 Indicator Number MDG Indicator Number Indicator Value Serbia Romasettlements CHILD MORTALITY Child mortality 1.1 4.1 Under-five mortality rate 15.0 per thousand 1.2 4.2 Infant mortality rate 14.0 per thousand NUTRITION Nutritional status Underweight prevalence 2.1a 1.8 Moderate and Severe (–2 SD) 1.6 6.6 percent 2.1b Severe (– 3 SD) 0.5 1.4 percent Stunting prevalence 2.2a Moderate and Severe (–2 SD) 6.6 23.6 percent 2.2b Severe (–3 SD) 3.2 9.7 percent Wasting prevalence 2.3a Moderate and Severe (–2 SD) 3.5 5.2 percent 2.3b Severe (–3 SD) 0.8 2.4 percent Breastfeeding and infant feeding 2.4 Children ever breastfed 90.1 93.2 percent 2.5 Early initiation of breastfeeding 7.6 10.0 percent 2.6 Exclusive breastfeeding under 6 months 13.7 9.1 percent 2.7 Continued breastfeeding at 1 year 18.4 54.0 percent 2.8 Continued breastfeeding at 2 years 15.3 36.9 percent 2.9 Predominant breastfeeding under 6 months 39.2 52.2 percent 2.10 Duration of breastfeeding 8.8 14.9 percent 2.11 Bottle feeding 84.6 81.8 percent 2.12 Introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft foods 84.1 65.3 percent 2.13 Minimum meal frequency 84.3 71.9 percent 2.14 Age-appropriate breastfeeding 19.3 33.5 percent 2.15 Milk feeding frequency for non-breastfed children 89.1 59.8 percent Low birth weight 2.18 Low-birthweight infants 4.8 10.2 percent 2.19 Infants weighed at birth 99.6 96.2 percent CHILD HEALTH Care of illness 3.8 Oral rehydration therapy with continued feeding 59.7 59.8 percent 3.9 Care seeking for suspected pneumonia 89.7 91.7 percent 3.10 Antibiotic treatment of suspected pneumonia 81.6 90.6 percent Solid fuel use 3.11 Solid fuels 31.6 75.5 percent MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201014 Topic MICS4 Indicator Number MDG Indicator Number Indicator Value Serbia Romasettlements WATER AND SANITATION Water and sanitation 4.1 7.8 Use of improved drinking water sources 99.5 97.7 percent 4.2 Water treatment 1.3 0.0 percent 4.3 7.9 Use of improved sanitation facilities 97.8 85.0 percent 4.4 Safe disposal of child’s faeces 25.7 13.4 percent 4.5 Place for hand-washing 99.3 91.4 percent 4.6 Availability of soap 99.1 95.7 percent REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH Contraception and unmet need 5.1 5.4 Adolescent birth rate 23.9 158.5 per thousand 5.2 Early childbearing 3.3 31.3 percent 5.3 5.3 Contraceptive prevalence rate 60.8 63.5 percent 5.4 5.6 Unmet need 6.6 10.2 percent Maternal and newborn health Antenatal care coverage 5.5a 5.5 At least once by skilled personnel 99.0 94.5 percent 5.5b At least four times by any provider 94.2 71.9 percent 5.6 Content of antenatal care 97.8 88.5 percent 5.7 5.2 Skilled attendant at delivery 99.7 99.5 percent 5.8 Institutional deliveries 99.8 99.3 percent 5.9 Caesarean section 24.6 13.6 percent CHILD DEVELOPMENT Child development 6.1 Support for learning 95.2 67.2 percent 6.2 Father’s support for learning 78.0 62.5 percent 6.3 Learning materials: children’s books 75.9 23.1 percent 6.4 Learning materials: playthings 62.8 54.4 percent 6.5 Inadequate care 1.0 4.7 percent 6.6 Early child development index 94.3 88.3 percent 6.7 Attendance to early childhood education 43.8 8.2 percent EDUCATION Literacy and education 7.1 2.3 Literacy rate among young Women age 15–24 99.3 76.5 percent Men age 15–24 99.5 77.8 percent 7.2 School readiness 97.2 78.0 percent 7.3 Net intake rate in primary education 94.9 90.9 percent 7.4 2.1 Primary school net attendance ratio (adjusted) 98.7 88.5 percent 7.5 Secondary school net attendance ratio (adjusted) 89.3 19.3 percent 7.6 2.2 Children reaching last grade of primary 98.9 89.9 percent 7.7 Primary completion rate 104.1 62.7 percent Net primary completion rate 92.0 35.0 percent 7.8 Transition rate to secondary school 98.1 68.1 percent 7.9 3.1 Gender parity index (primary school) 1.01 0.96 ratio 7.10 3.1 Gender parity index (secondary school) 1.02 0.72 ratio MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 15 Topic MICS4 Indicator Number MDG Indicator Number Indicator Value Serbia Romasettlements CHILD PROTECTION Birth registration 8.1 Birth registration 98.9 98.8 percent Child discipline 8.5 Violent discipline 67.1 86.1 percent Early marriage 8.6 Marriage before age 15 Women age 15–49 0.8 16.2 percent 8.7 Marriage before age 18 Women age 20–49 7.7 53.7 percent 8.8 Young women and men age 15–19 currently married or in union Women age 15–19 5.2 44.3 percent Men age 15–19 1.2 19.0 percent Spousal age difference 8.10a Women age 15–19 7.8 2.5 percent 8.10b Women age 20–24 8.9 5.0 percent Domestic violence 8.14 Attitudes towards domestic violence Women age 15–49 2.9 20.1 percent HIV/AIDS AND SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR HIV/AIDS knowledge and attitudes 9.1 Comprehensive knowledge about HIV prevention Women age 15–49 52.7 13.3 percent 9.2 6.3 Comprehensive knowledge about HIV prevention among young people Women age 15–24 54.1 12.2 percent Men age 15–24 47.6 11.1 percent 9.3 Knowledge of mother-to-child transmission of HIV 65.1 47.2 percent 9.4 Accepting attitude towards people living with HIV Women age 15–49 12.6 3.6 percent 9.5 Women and men who know where to be tested for HIV Women age 15–49 74.1 29.4 percent 9.6 Women and men who have been tested for HIV and know the results Women age 15–49 1.4 0.3 percent 9.7 Sexually active young women and men who have been tested for HIV and know the results Women age 15–24 2.5 0.7 percent Men age 15–24 3.3 4.1 percent 9.8 HIV counselling during antenatal care 18.9 5.7 percent 9.9 HIV testing during antenatal care 13.9 2.0 percent MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201016 Topic MICS4 Indicator Number MDG Indicator Number Indicator Value Serbia Romasettlements Sexual behaviour 9.10 Young women and men who have never had sex Women age 15–24 47.5 83.0 percent Men age 15–24 32.4 54.7 percent 9.11 Sex before age 15 among young women and men Women age 15–24 1.7 14.4 percent Men age 15–24 4.2 13.3 percent 9.12 Age-mixing among sexual partners Women age 15–24 4.3 5.8 percent Men age 15–24 0.3 0.6 percent 9.13 Sex with multiple partners Women age 15–49 1.7 2.1 percent 9.14 Condom use during sex with multiple partners Women age 15–49 57.1 26.2 percent 9.15 Sex with non-regular partners Women age 15–24 41.2 8.9 percent Men age 15–24 60.7 32.3 percent 9.16 6.2 Condom use with non-regular partners Women age 15–24 77.1 37.0 percent Men age 15–24 80.0 51.2 percent ACCESS TO MASS MEDIA AND USE OF INFORMATION/COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY Mass media, computers and internet MT.1 Exposure to mass media Women age 15–49 57.6 19.0 percent MT.2 Use of computer among young Women age 15–24 91.4 39.1 percent Men age 15–24 92.6 63.1 percent MT.3 Use of internet among young Women age 15–24 85.0 25.2 percent Men age 15–24 86.2 52.4 percent SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING Life satisfaction SW.1 Life satisfaction among young Women age 15–24 66.8 58.7 percent Men age 15–24 68.2 53.1 percent SW.2 Happiness among young Women age 15–24 93.3 87.3 percent Men age 15–24 92.3 86.7 percent SW.3 Perception of a better life among young Women age 15–24 43.2 26.2 percent Men age 15–24 36.2 25.5 percent MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 17 The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey in Serbia is a The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey in Serbia is a nationally representative sample survey of households, nationally representative sample survey of households, women, young men and children. In addition to carrying women, young men and children. In addition to carrying out MICS4 on a nationally representative sample, a out MICS4 on a nationally representative sample, a survey was also carried out on a separate sample of Roma survey was also carried out on a separate sample of Roma settlements in Serbia. settlements in Serbia. The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS4) was The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS4) was carried out in 2010 by the Statistical Office of the Republic carried out in 2010 by the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia with financial and technical support from the of Serbia with financial and technical support from the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). The results United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). The results pertain to November–December 2010, when the fieldwork pertain to November–December 2010, when the fieldwork was conducted. was conducted. Survey findings from both samples are presented jointly Survey findings from both samples are presented jointly in this report. in this report. Child mortalityChild mortality The infant mortality rate among children living The infant mortality rate among children living in Roma settlements is estimated at 14 per thousand in Roma settlements is estimated at 14 per thousand live births, while the probability of dying under the live births, while the probability of dying under the age of 5 is around 15 per thousand live births (almost age of 5 is around 15 per thousand live births (almost double the national average).double the national average). Nutritional statusNutritional status 16 percent of children under the age of five are 16 percent of children under the age of five are overweightoverweight The prevalence of child malnourishment (moderate The prevalence of child malnourishment (moderate and severe) in Serbia is relatively low: the prevalence of and severe) in Serbia is relatively low: the prevalence of underweight is nearly 2 percent, close to 7 percent of underweight is nearly 2 percent, close to 7 percent of children are stunted, and 4 percent are wasted. children are stunted, and 4 percent are wasted. The opposite nutritional status is found amongThe opposite nutritional status is found among children living in Roma settlements — the prevalence children living in Roma settlements — the prevalence of malnourishment is several times higher than the of malnourishment is several times higher than the EXECUTIVE SUMMARYEXECUTIVE SUMMARY national average (around 7 percent of children are national average (around 7 percent of children are underweight and around 24 percent stunted). However, underweight and around 24 percent stunted). However, the prevalence of obesity is similar — 13 percent. the prevalence of obesity is similar — 13 percent. BreastfeedingBreastfeeding Although all children aged less than six months should Although all children aged less than six months should still be breastfed exclusively, only approximately 14 still be breastfed exclusively, only approximately 14 percent were exclusively breastfed at this age.percent were exclusively breastfed at this age. Only 8 percent of last-born children in the 2 years Only 8 percent of last-born children in the 2 years preceding the survey were breastfed for the first time preceding the survey were breastfed for the first time within one hour of birth, and 39 percent of children within one hour of birth, and 39 percent of children aged 0–5 months were predominantly breastfed. aged 0–5 months were predominantly breastfed. Between the ages of 6–23 months, 21 percent of Between the ages of 6–23 months, 21 percent of children receive breast milk and solid or semi-solid children receive breast milk and solid or semi-solid foods. Among children aged 0–23 months, 19 percent foods. Among children aged 0–23 months, 19 percent are appropriately breastfed. Roma children living in are appropriately breastfed. Roma children living in settlements are more likely to continue to be breastfed settlements are more likely to continue to be breastfed than the national sample. 41 percent of Roma children than the national sample. 41 percent of Roma children aged 6–23 months are receiving breast milk and solid aged 6–23 months are receiving breast milk and solid or semi-solid food, and among Roma children aged or semi-solid food, and among Roma children aged 0–23 months, 34 percent are appropriately breastfed.0–23 months, 34 percent are appropriately breastfed. Low birth weightLow birth weight Out of 99.6 percent of weighed live births, 5 percent Out of 99.6 percent of weighed live births, 5 percent were below 2500 grams. In the Roma settlements, 96 were below 2500 grams. In the Roma settlements, 96 percent of live births were weighed, and 10 percent of percent of live births were weighed, and 10 percent of those births were underweight.those births were underweight. Oral rehydration treatmentOral rehydration treatment Overall, 8 percent of children under the age of five Overall, 8 percent of children under the age of five had diarrhoea in the two weeks preceding the survey. had diarrhoea in the two weeks preceding the survey. A higher prevalence of diarrhoea is noticeable among A higher prevalence of diarrhoea is noticeable among children living in Roma settlements, 14 percent. children living in Roma settlements, 14 percent. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201018 Approximately 73 percent of children with diarrhoea Approximately 73 percent of children with diarrhoea received one or more of the recommended home received one or more of the recommended home treatments (i.e., were treated with oral rehydration treatments (i.e., were treated with oral rehydration solution (ORS) or a recommended homemade fluid), solution (ORS) or a recommended homemade fluid), while 12 percent received no treatmentwhile 12 percent received no treatment Less than one third (32 percent) of children under-five Less than one third (32 percent) of children under-five with diarrhoea drank more than usual while 67 percent with diarrhoea drank more than usual while 67 percent drank the same or less. Two thirds (76 percent) ate drank the same or less. Two thirds (76 percent) ate somewhat less, same or more, but 24 percent ate much somewhat less, same or more, but 24 percent ate much less or ate almost nothing. The situation is very similar less or ate almost nothing. The situation is very similar among children living in Roma settlements.among children living in Roma settlements. Care seeking and antibiotic treatment of pneumoniaCare seeking and antibiotic treatment of pneumonia Five percent of children aged 0–59 months were Five percent of children aged 0–59 months were reported to have had symptoms of pneumonia during reported to have had symptoms of pneumonia during the two weeks preceding the survey. Of these children, the two weeks preceding the survey. Of these children, 90 percent were taken to an appropriate provider. 90 percent were taken to an appropriate provider. Children with suspected pneumonia were most often Children with suspected pneumonia were most often taken to a public health care provider — 38 percent to a taken to a public health care provider — 38 percent to a primary health care centre; 35 percent to a government primary health care centre; 35 percent to a government hospital. Furthermore, 82 percent of under-5 children hospital. Furthermore, 82 percent of under-5 children with suspected pneumonia had received an antibiotic with suspected pneumonia had received an antibiotic during the two weeks prior to the survey.during the two weeks prior to the survey. Overall, 26 percent of women knew of the two danger Overall, 26 percent of women knew of the two danger signs of pneumonia — fast and difficult breathing. signs of pneumonia — fast and difficult breathing. The most commonly identified symptom for taking The most commonly identified symptom for taking a child to a health facility is developing a fever (85 a child to a health facility is developing a fever (85 percent). Furthermore, 47 percent of mothers identified percent). Furthermore, 47 percent of mothers identified difficult breathing and 32 percent of mothers identified difficult breathing and 32 percent of mothers identified fast breathing as symptoms for taking children fast breathing as symptoms for taking children immediately to a health care provider. immediately to a health care provider. Among children living in Roma settlements, 18 Among children living in Roma settlements, 18 percent aged 0–59 months were reported to have had percent aged 0–59 months were reported to have had symptoms of pneumonia. 92 percent were taken to an symptoms of pneumonia. 92 percent were taken to an appropriate provider and 91 percent had received an appropriate provider and 91 percent had received an antibiotic during the two weeks prior to the survey.antibiotic during the two weeks prior to the survey. Only 16 percent of women in Roma settlements knew of Only 16 percent of women in Roma settlements knew of the two danger signs of pneumonia. Difficult breathing the two danger signs of pneumonia. Difficult breathing was identified as a symptom that requires immediate was identified as a symptom that requires immediate health care by 28 percent of mothers, and fast breathing health care by 28 percent of mothers, and fast breathing was identified by 20 percent of mothers, while the most was identified by 20 percent of mothers, while the most commonly identified symptom for taking a child to commonly identified symptom for taking a child to a health facility was developing a fever (82 percent). a health facility was developing a fever (82 percent). When it comes to recognizing the danger signs of When it comes to recognizing the danger signs of pneumonia, there are significant differences depending pneumonia, there are significant differences depending on the mother’s education. Only 9 percent of mothers on the mother’s education. Only 9 percent of mothers without education know the two signs compared with without education know the two signs compared with 24 percent of those with secondary education. 24 percent of those with secondary education. Solid fuel useSolid fuel use Almost one third (32 percent) of all households in Almost one third (32 percent) of all households in Serbia use solid fuels for cooking. A much higher Serbia use solid fuels for cooking. A much higher proportion of solid fuel usage is noticed among proportion of solid fuel usage is noticed among the poorest quintile (73 percent) and in Roma the poorest quintile (73 percent) and in Roma households (76 percent).households (76 percent). Water and sanitation Water and sanitation 100 percent of the population has access to an 100 percent of the population has access to an improved drinking water source (if one uses a broad improved drinking water source (if one uses a broad definition of access where improved drinking water definition of access where improved drinking water sources include piped water, a public tap/standpipe, sources include piped water, a public tap/standpipe, a tubewell/borehole, a protected well or spring). 79 a tubewell/borehole, a protected well or spring). 79 percent of the population uses water piped into their percent of the population uses water piped into their dwelling from a public or local water supply as their dwelling from a public or local water supply as their main source of drinking water. Such access is higher main source of drinking water. Such access is higher in urban areas (84 percent) than in rural areas (73 in urban areas (84 percent) than in rural areas (73 percent). percent). The situation is similar in Roma settlements where 98 The situation is similar in Roma settlements where 98 percent of the population uses an improved source of percent of the population uses an improved source of drinking water — 99 percent in urban areas and 96 drinking water — 99 percent in urban areas and 96 percent in rural areas.percent in rural areas. Virtually the entire population uses sanitary means Virtually the entire population uses sanitary means of excreta disposal. 94 percent have a flush toilet of excreta disposal. 94 percent have a flush toilet connected either to a sewage system or septic tank. connected either to a sewage system or septic tank. Septic tanks are much more common in rural areas Septic tanks are much more common in rural areas — 71 percent — compared to 13 percent in urban areas. — 71 percent — compared to 13 percent in urban areas. On the other hand, only 62 percent of households in On the other hand, only 62 percent of households in Roma settlements have a flush toilet connected either Roma settlements have a flush toilet connected either to a sewage system or a septic tank. This is much less to a sewage system or a septic tank. This is much less common in the poorest quintile (6 percent) than in common in the poorest quintile (6 percent) than in the richest quintile (96 percent).the richest quintile (96 percent). ContraceptionContraception Current use of any contraception was reported by Current use of any contraception was reported by 61 percent of women aged 15–49, currently married 61 percent of women aged 15–49, currently married or in union. Among women in Serbia, traditional or in union. Among women in Serbia, traditional methods are more popular than modern ones, 39 methods are more popular than modern ones, 39 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 19 percent compared to 22 percent. The most popular percent compared to 22 percent. The most popular method is withdrawal which is used by one in three method is withdrawal which is used by one in three married women. The next most popular method is married women. The next most popular method is the male condom, which accounts for 14 percent of the male condom, which accounts for 14 percent of married women. Eight percent of women reported married women. Eight percent of women reported use of periodic abstinence, while between 3 and 4 use of periodic abstinence, while between 3 and 4 percent of women used the IUD and the pill.percent of women used the IUD and the pill. Use of contraception is not very different across Use of contraception is not very different across regions, ranging from 57 percent in Sumadija and regions, ranging from 57 percent in Sumadija and Western Serbia to 67 percent in Vojvodina. Usage Western Serbia to 67 percent in Vojvodina. Usage in urban and rural areas is also almost the same. in urban and rural areas is also almost the same. Adolescents are less likely to use contraception Adolescents are less likely to use contraception than older women. Women’s education level is than older women. Women’s education level is associated with prevalence of contraception usage. associated with prevalence of contraception usage. The percentage of women using any method of The percentage of women using any method of contraception rises from 53 percent among those contraception rises from 53 percent among those with only primary education to 65 percent among with only primary education to 65 percent among women with higher education.women with higher education. Among women living in Roma settlements, aged Among women living in Roma settlements, aged 15–49, currently married or in union, use of 15–49, currently married or in union, use of contraception was reported by 64 percent (58 percent contraception was reported by 64 percent (58 percent traditional methods and 6 percent modern methods). traditional methods and 6 percent modern methods). The most popular method is withdrawal, used by The most popular method is withdrawal, used by about half the women. Adolescents are again less about half the women. Adolescents are again less likely to use contraception than older women. Only likely to use contraception than older women. Only about 41 percent of women, married or in union, about 41 percent of women, married or in union, aged 15–19, currently use a method of contraception aged 15–19, currently use a method of contraception compared to 59 percent of those aged 20–24 years compared to 59 percent of those aged 20–24 years old, and 78 percent of older women (35–39 years old, and 78 percent of older women (35–39 years old). The percentage of women using any method old). The percentage of women using any method of contraception rises from 53 percent among those of contraception rises from 53 percent among those with no education to 70 percent among women with with no education to 70 percent among women with secondary education.secondary education. Unmet needUnmet need In Serbia, 7 percent of women married or in union have In Serbia, 7 percent of women married or in union have an unmet need for contraception. The unmet need of an unmet need for contraception. The unmet need of women within the age group of 25–29 years is higher women within the age group of 25–29 years is higher (13 percent). (13 percent). In Roma settlements, 10 percent of women married In Roma settlements, 10 percent of women married or in union have an unmet need for contraception. or in union have an unmet need for contraception. This is higher among women aged 20–24 (15 percent) This is higher among women aged 20–24 (15 percent) and aged 25–29 (18 percent). There is also a difference and aged 25–29 (18 percent). There is also a difference between rural (4 percent) and urban (13 percent) areas.between rural (4 percent) and urban (13 percent) areas. Antenatal careAntenatal care Coverage of antenatal care is high in Serbia, with 99 Coverage of antenatal care is high in Serbia, with 99 percent of women receiving antenatal care (ANC) percent of women receiving antenatal care (ANC) at least once during the pregnancy. Lower antenatal at least once during the pregnancy. Lower antenatal care is noticed among Roma women from the poorest care is noticed among Roma women from the poorest quintile (95 percent).quintile (95 percent). A high percentage (97 percent) of mothers received A high percentage (97 percent) of mothers received antenatal care more than once and 94 percent antenatal care more than once and 94 percent received ANC at least four times. However, in Roma received ANC at least four times. However, in Roma settlements, 85 percent of mothers received antenatal settlements, 85 percent of mothers received antenatal care more than once and 72 percent at least four times.care more than once and 72 percent at least four times. Assistance at deliveryAssistance at delivery With 99.7 percent of births, skilled personnel assisted With 99.7 percent of births, skilled personnel assisted at the delivery and almost the same percentage of at the delivery and almost the same percentage of women delivered in health facilities (99.8 percent). women delivered in health facilities (99.8 percent). Among women living in Roma settlements, 99.5 Among women living in Roma settlements, 99.5 percent had skilled personnel assisting at delivery and percent had skilled personnel assisting at delivery and 99.3 percent of births were given in a health facility.99.3 percent of births were given in a health facility. At delivery, medical doctors assisted in 93 percent of At delivery, medical doctors assisted in 93 percent of births (88 percent for Roma women) while nurses assisted births (88 percent for Roma women) while nurses assisted in 7 percent of deliveries (12 percent for Roma women).in 7 percent of deliveries (12 percent for Roma women). Child developmentChild development For about 95 percent of children under-five an adult For about 95 percent of children under-five an adult was engaged in four or more activities that promote was engaged in four or more activities that promote learning and school readiness during the 3 days learning and school readiness during the 3 days preceding the survey. The average number of activities preceding the survey. The average number of activities was 6. The involvement of fathers in such activities was 6. The involvement of fathers in such activities was lower (78 percent). was lower (78 percent). Children from the poorest quintile and those from Children from the poorest quintile and those from Roma households are less likely to be involved in Roma households are less likely to be involved in activities that promote learning (84 and 67 percent activities that promote learning (84 and 67 percent respectively) as well as children from Vojvodina (89 respectively) as well as children from Vojvodina (89 percent). Furthermore, a larger proportion of fathers percent). Furthermore, a larger proportion of fathers were engaged in activities with boys (82 percent) than were engaged in activities with boys (82 percent) than with girls (74 percent). However, this difference is not with girls (74 percent). However, this difference is not observed among Roma fathers where 64 percent are observed among Roma fathers where 64 percent are involved in activities with boys and 61 percent with girls. involved in activities with boys and 61 percent with girls. One percent of children under the age of 5 were left One percent of children under the age of 5 were left with inadequate care during the week preceding the with inadequate care during the week preceding the survey. The situation is different in Roma settlements survey. The situation is different in Roma settlements MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201020 where 5 percent of children were left, either alone,where 5 percent of children were left, either alone, or in the care of another child.or in the care of another child. Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI)Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI) In Serbia, 94 percent of children aged 36–59 months In Serbia, 94 percent of children aged 36–59 months are developmentally on track. There are no relevant are developmentally on track. There are no relevant differentials among boys and girls. Looking at the differentials among boys and girls. Looking at the mother’s education, ECDI is 84 percent for children mother’s education, ECDI is 84 percent for children whose mother has primary education and 96 percent whose mother has primary education and 96 percent for those with higher education levels.for those with higher education levels. In Roma settlements, 88 percent of children aged In Roma settlements, 88 percent of children aged 36–59 months are developmentally on track. There 36–59 months are developmentally on track. There are some differentials among boys and girls. The are some differentials among boys and girls. The ECDI ECDI for male children is 86, and 91 for female for male children is 86, and 91 for female children. children. The index is higher for children who are attending The index is higher for children who are attending early childhood education programmes (99 percent). early childhood education programmes (99 percent). Looking at the mother’s education, ECDI is 88 percent Looking at the mother’s education, ECDI is 88 percent for children for children whose mother has primary education and whose mother has primary education and 95 percent 95 percent when the mother has secondary education. when the mother has secondary education. Attendance to early childhood education programmes Attendance to early childhood education programmes and school readinessand school readiness 44 percent of children aged 36–59 months were 44 percent of children aged 36–59 months were attending some forms of organized early childhood attending some forms of organized early childhood education programme. Attendance was almost double education programme. Attendance was almost double in urban (57 percent) than in rural areas (29 percent). in urban (57 percent) than in rural areas (29 percent). Increasing wealth status also implies a higher proportion Increasing wealth status also implies a higher proportion of children attending early childhood education of children attending early childhood education programmes — 75 percent for the richest quintile and programmes — 75 percent for the richest quintile and 22 percent for the poorest quintile.22 percent for the poorest quintile. Roma children attend early childhood education Roma children attend early childhood education programmes five times less than the rest of the programmes five times less than the rest of the population (8 percent).population (8 percent). Primary and secondary school participationPrimary and secondary school participation 95 percent of children of primary school entry age 95 percent of children of primary school entry age are currently attending first grade while 91 percent are currently attending first grade while 91 percent of Roma children start primary education on time.of Roma children start primary education on time. The majority (99 percent) of children of primary The majority (99 percent) of children of primary school age attend primary education. In the Roma school age attend primary education. In the Roma population only 89 percent of children of this age population only 89 percent of children of this age attend primary school.attend primary school. Almost all children who entered first grade of primary Almost all children who entered first grade of primary school eventually reached grade eight.school eventually reached grade eight. About 89 percent of children between the ages of About 89 percent of children between the ages of 15 and 18 are attending secondary or higher school. 15 and 18 are attending secondary or higher school. However, only 19 percent of children from Roma However, only 19 percent of children from Roma settlements are attending school at that age. In both settlements are attending school at that age. In both cases, children from wealthier households are more cases, children from wealthier households are more likely to attend secondary school or higher.likely to attend secondary school or higher. The Gender Parity Index (GPI) in Serbia is 1.01 for The Gender Parity Index (GPI) in Serbia is 1.01 for primary and 1.02 for secondary schools. Among primary and 1.02 for secondary schools. Among children living in Roma settlements, the GPI for children living in Roma settlements, the GPI for primary school is 0.96. Among children whose primary school is 0.96. Among children whose mother has primary education the GPI is 1.00 and in mother has primary education the GPI is 1.00 and in the richest quintile it is 1.01. The GPI for secondary the richest quintile it is 1.01. The GPI for secondary school is 0.72 meaning that girls are disadvantaged school is 0.72 meaning that girls are disadvantaged in in secondary education.secondary education. Adult literacyAdult literacy The literacy rate for women and men, aged between The literacy rate for women and men, aged between 15 and 24, is over 99 percent, and is lower only among 15 and 24, is over 99 percent, and is lower only among persons with just primary education (94 percent). On persons with just primary education (94 percent). On the other hand, only slightly over three quarters of the other hand, only slightly over three quarters of Roma are literate (77 percent of women and 78 percent Roma are literate (77 percent of women and 78 percent of men). The worst situation is among women and men of men). The worst situation is among women and men from the poorest quintile in Roma settlements where from the poorest quintile in Roma settlements where less than half are literate. less than half are literate. Birth registrationBirth registration The births of 99 percent of children under-five in The births of 99 percent of children under-five in Serbia have been registered. There are no significant Serbia have been registered. There are no significant variations in birth registration across sex, age, or variations in birth registration across sex, age, or education categories. The same applies for children education categories. The same applies for children living in Roma settlements.living in Roma settlements. Child DisciplineChild Discipline In Serbia, 67 percent of children aged between 2 and In Serbia, 67 percent of children aged between 2 and 14 were subjected to at least one form of psychological 14 were subjected to at least one form of psychological or physical punishment by their mothers/caretakers or physical punishment by their mothers/caretakers or other household members. Two percent of children or other household members. Two percent of children were subjected to severe physical punishment while were subjected to severe physical punishment while only 28 percent experienced methods of non-violent only 28 percent experienced methods of non-violent disciplining.disciplining. MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 21 Male children were subjected more to both minor and Male children were subjected more to both minor and severe physical discipline (39 and 2 percent) than female severe physical discipline (39 and 2 percent) than female children (36 and 1 percent). Differentials with respect to children (36 and 1 percent). Differentials with respect to many of the background variables were relatively small, many of the background variables were relatively small, but it was noted that psychical punishment is almost but it was noted that psychical punishment is almost twice as common in households whose head has only twice as common in households whose head has only primary education (45 percent) compared with heads of primary education (45 percent) compared with heads of households with higher education (26 percent).households with higher education (26 percent). In Roma settlements, 86 percent of children aged 2–14 In Roma settlements, 86 percent of children aged 2–14 years were subjected to at least one form of psychological years were subjected to at least one form of psychological or physical punishment by their mothers/caretakers or or physical punishment by their mothers/caretakers or other household members and 6 percent of children other household members and 6 percent of children were subjected to severe physical punishment. On the were subjected to severe physical punishment. On the other hand, 23 percent of mothers/caretakers believe other hand, 23 percent of mothers/caretakers believe that children should be physically punished.that children should be physically punished. Early marriageEarly marriage The proportion of women aged between 15 and 49 who The proportion of women aged between 15 and 49 who got married before the age of 15 is very low (1 percent). got married before the age of 15 is very low (1 percent). Around 5 percent of women aged 15 to 19 are currently Around 5 percent of women aged 15 to 19 are currently married or in union. This practice is more common married or in union. This practice is more common in rural areas, among the less educated and especially in rural areas, among the less educated and especially among Roma (44 percent). Early marriage seems to be among Roma (44 percent). Early marriage seems to be more common among women than men aged 15 to 29.more common among women than men aged 15 to 29. Eight percent of young women aged 15 to 19 are married Eight percent of young women aged 15 to 19 are married to a man 10 or more years older. The percentage is to a man 10 or more years older. The percentage is similar (9 percent) among married women aged 20 to 24.similar (9 percent) among married women aged 20 to 24. Domestic violenceDomestic violence 3 percent of women in Serbia feel that a husband/3 percent of women in Serbia feel that a husband/ partner has a right to hit or beat his wife or partner partner has a right to hit or beat his wife or partner for at least one of a variety of reasons. Women who for at least one of a variety of reasons. Women who condone husband/partner violence, in most cases condone husband/partner violence, in most cases justify violence when women neglect the children justify violence when women neglect the children (2 percent), or if women demonstrate their autonomy, (2 percent), or if women demonstrate their autonomy, e.g. go out without telling their husbands or argue e.g. go out without telling their husbands or argue with them (1 percent).with them (1 percent). Domestic violence is more accepted in Roma settlements Domestic violence is more accepted in Roma settlements where 20 percent of women feel it can be justified. The where 20 percent of women feel it can be justified. The most common reasons given are the same: when they most common reasons given are the same: when they neglect the children (18 percent) or demonstrate their neglect the children (18 percent) or demonstrate their autonomy, e.g. argue with their husband (12 percent) or autonomy, e.g. argue with their husband (12 percent) or go out without telling him (11 percent).go out without telling him (11 percent). Knowledge of HIV transmissionKnowledge of HIV transmission In Serbia, 53 percent of women aged between 15–49 In Serbia, 53 percent of women aged between 15–49 years had a comprehensive knowledge of HIV, while years had a comprehensive knowledge of HIV, while this was the case for 54 percent of young women and this was the case for 54 percent of young women and 48 percent of young men (15–24). This percentage 48 percent of young men (15–24). This percentage was lower among the population of Roma settlements was lower among the population of Roma settlements where there were only 13 percent of women between where there were only 13 percent of women between 15–49 years with comprehensive knowledge. In the 15–49 years with comprehensive knowledge. In the 15–24 age-group it went down to 12 percent for women 15–24 age-group it went down to 12 percent for women and 11 percent for men. and 11 percent for men. 99 percent of young women and men aged 15–24 had 99 percent of young women and men aged 15–24 had heard of AIDS. However, only 72 percent of young heard of AIDS. However, only 72 percent of young women and 86 percent of young men from Roma women and 86 percent of young men from Roma settlements had heard of AIDS. Women and men settlements had heard of AIDS. Women and men from Roma settlements living in rural areas, with no from Roma settlements living in rural areas, with no education and from the poorest quintile were much education and from the poorest quintile were much less aware of AIDS.less aware of AIDS. A high percentage of women aged between 15–49 A high percentage of women aged between 15–49 years knew that HIV transmission can be prevented years knew that HIV transmission can be prevented by having only one faithful, uninfected sexual partner by having only one faithful, uninfected sexual partner (88 percent) and by using a condom every time (91 (88 percent) and by using a condom every time (91 percent). Eighty percent of women knew that a healthy percent). Eighty percent of women knew that a healthy looking person can have the AIDS virus and 75 percent looking person can have the AIDS virus and 75 percent that HIV cannot be transmitted by mosquito bites or that HIV cannot be transmitted by mosquito bites or by sharing food with someone with AIDS. by sharing food with someone with AIDS. Half of the women between 15–49 from Roma Half of the women between 15–49 from Roma settlements knew that transmission can be prevented settlements knew that transmission can be prevented by having only one faithful, uninfected sexual partner by having only one faithful, uninfected sexual partner (53 percent) and by using a condom every time (52 (53 percent) and by using a condom every time (52 percent). However, only 44 percent of them knew that percent). However, only 44 percent of them knew that a healthy looking person can have the HIV virus while a healthy looking person can have the HIV virus while around one third knew that it cannot be transmitted around one third knew that it cannot be transmitted through mosquito bites or by sharing food with through mosquito bites or by sharing food with someone with AIDS. someone with AIDS. In total, 13 percent of women aged between 15–49 In total, 13 percent of women aged between 15–49 years expressed accepting attitudes on all four years expressed accepting attitudes on all four indicators towards people living with HIV. The results indicators towards people living with HIV. The results are similar among young people (15–24) where 12 are similar among young people (15–24) where 12 percent of women and 9 percent of men had accepting percent of women and 9 percent of men had accepting attitudes. Acceptance was higher in urban areas and it attitudes. Acceptance was higher in urban areas and it increased with education and wealth index. Accepting increased with education and wealth index. Accepting attitudes were shared by only 4 percent of women aged attitudes were shared by only 4 percent of women aged 15–49 living in Roma settlements. 15–49 living in Roma settlements. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201022 Three out of four women (15–49) knew a place to get Three out of four women (15–49) knew a place to get tested for HIV, but only 10 percent of them have ever tested for HIV, but only 10 percent of them have ever been tested, with almost the same values for both been tested, with almost the same values for both indicators for young men (15–29). Only 4 percent of indicators for young men (15–29). Only 4 percent of women from Roma settlements had been tested for women from Roma settlements had been tested for HIV and 29 percent knew where testing can be done. HIV and 29 percent knew where testing can be done. Values are the same for young men (15–29) for testing, Values are the same for young men (15–29) for testing, but a little bit higher for knowing a place (36 percent). but a little bit higher for knowing a place (36 percent). Among women aged 15–49 that have given birth Among women aged 15–49 that have given birth within the two years preceding the survey, 19 percent within the two years preceding the survey, 19 percent received HIV counseling. The values are higher for received HIV counseling. The values are higher for women in Belgrade (33 percent) and those with the women in Belgrade (33 percent) and those with the highest education (26 percent). Only 6 percent of highest education (26 percent). Only 6 percent of all women in Roma settlements had received HIV all women in Roma settlements had received HIV counseling during antenatal care.counseling during antenatal care. Sexual behaviourSexual behaviour 61 percent of all young women and 70 percent of 61 percent of all young women and 70 percent of young men aged 15–24 years had had sex. Forty one young men aged 15–24 years had had sex. Forty one percent of women and 61 percent of men had had percent of women and 61 percent of men had had sex with a non-regular partner in the 12 months sex with a non-regular partner in the 12 months preceding preceding the survey. A condom was used by 77 the survey. A condom was used by 77 percent of percent of young women and 80 percent of men young women and 80 percent of men who had sexual intercourse with their last non-who had sexual intercourse with their last non- regular partner. regular partner. Seventy-three percent of young women and 71 Seventy-three percent of young women and 71 percent of young men (15–24) living in Roma percent of young men (15–24) living in Roma settlements had had sex. Nine percent of young settlements had had sex. Nine percent of young women and 32 percent women and 32 percent of men from Roma of men from Roma settlements had had sex with settlements had had sex with non-regular partners. non-regular partners. Usage of condom in this high-risk intercourse is Usage of condom in this high-risk intercourse is very low among young women (37 percent) and a very low among young women (37 percent) and a bit higher among men (51 percent).bit higher among men (51 percent). The number of women who had sex before the age The number of women who had sex before the age of 15 is very low — 2 percent of young women and 4 of 15 is very low — 2 percent of young women and 4 percent of young men. On the other hand, 14 percent percent of young men. On the other hand, 14 percent of young women and 13 percent of young men from of young women and 13 percent of young men from Roma settlements had sex before the age of 15.Roma settlements had sex before the age of 15. Having sex with a partner 10 or more years older Having sex with a partner 10 or more years older is reported by 4 percent of young women from the is reported by 4 percent of young women from the national sample and by 6 percent of young women national sample and by 6 percent of young women living in Roma settlements (more in rural than urban living in Roma settlements (more in rural than urban areas). For men, it is below 1 percent for both samples.areas). For men, it is below 1 percent for both samples. Exposure to Mass Media and ICTExposure to Mass Media and ICT Fifty eight percent of all women aged 15–49 were exposed Fifty eight percent of all women aged 15–49 were exposed to all three mass media (watch television, listen to the to all three mass media (watch television, listen to the radio and read newspapers) at least once a week, while less radio and read newspapers) at least once a week, while less than 1 percent of women received no media exposure. than 1 percent of women received no media exposure. Only 19 percent of women in Roma settlements were Only 19 percent of women in Roma settlements were exposed to three mass media at least once a week. Sixty exposed to three mass media at least once a week. Sixty percent of all men aged 15–29, but only one quarter of percent of all men aged 15–29, but only one quarter of young men in Roma settlements, were exposed to all young men in Roma settlements, were exposed to all three mass media at least once a week.three mass media at least once a week. The majority of young women aged 15–24 (91 percent)The majority of young women aged 15–24 (91 percent) had used a computer, and 85 percent had used had used a computer, and 85 percent had used the internet during the last 12 months. In Roma the internet during the last 12 months. In Roma settlements, only 39 percent of young women had settlements, only 39 percent of young women had used a computer and 25 percent had used the internet used a computer and 25 percent had used the internet during the last 12 months. Usage of computers and during the last 12 months. Usage of computers and internet among young men is higher: 93 percent had internet among young men is higher: 93 percent had used computers and 86 percent had used internet in used computers and 86 percent had used internet in the last 12 months. In Roma settlements, 63 percent of the last 12 months. In Roma settlements, 63 percent of young men had used a computer and 52 percent used young men had used a computer and 52 percent used the internet during the last 12 months.the internet during the last 12 months. Subjective Well-beingSubjective Well-being Overall, 67 percent of women and 68 percent of Overall, 67 percent of women and 68 percent of men aged 15–24 years were satisfied with life. The men aged 15–24 years were satisfied with life. The proportion of women that are satisfied with life is proportion of women that are satisfied with life is somewhat higher in urban areas (70 percent) than somewhat higher in urban areas (70 percent) than in rural areas (61 percent). For young men, the in rural areas (61 percent). For young men, the differentials in terms of background characteristics are differentials in terms of background characteristics are generally similar to those observed for young women. generally similar to those observed for young women. Among young persons aged 15–24 living in Roma Among young persons aged 15–24 living in Roma settlements, only 59 percent of women and 53 percent settlements, only 59 percent of women and 53 percent of men were satisfied with life.of men were satisfied with life. Among the same age group, a similar percentage of Among the same age group, a similar percentage of women and men were very or somewhat happy (93 women and men were very or somewhat happy (93 and 92 percent respectively). The proportion in Roma and 92 percent respectively). The proportion in Roma settlements was 87 percent for both men and women.settlements was 87 percent for both men and women. The proportion of women aged between 15–24 years The proportion of women aged between 15–24 years who thought that their lives had improved during the who thought that their lives had improved during the previous year and believed that it would get better after previous year and believed that it would get better after one year, is 43 percent. The corresponding indicator one year, is 43 percent. The corresponding indicator for men aged 15–24 years is lower than that of young for men aged 15–24 years is lower than that of young women (36 percent). The proportion for both Roma women (36 percent). The proportion for both Roma men and women is even lower — 26 percent.men and women is even lower — 26 percent. MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 23 BackgroundBackground This report is based on the Serbia Multiple Indicator This report is based on the Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, conducted in 2010 by UNICEF and the Cluster Survey, conducted in 2010 by UNICEF and the Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia (SORS). The Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia (SORS). The survey provides valuable information on the situation of survey provides valuable information on the situation of children, women and men in Serbia, and was based, in large children, women and men in Serbia, and was based, in large part, on the needs to monitor progress towards goals and part, on the needs to monitor progress towards goals and targets emanating from recent international agreements: targets emanating from recent international agreements: I INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION the Millennium Declaration, adopted by all 191 United the Millennium Declaration, adopted by all 191 United Nations Member States in September 2000, and the Plan Nations Member States in September 2000, and the Plan of Action of A World Fit For Children, adopted by 189 of Action of A World Fit For Children, adopted by 189 Member States at the United Nations Special Session on Member States at the United Nations Special Session on Children in May 2002. Both of these commitments build Children in May 2002. Both of these commitments build upon promises made by the international community at upon promises made by the international community at the 1990 World Summit for Children.the 1990 World Summit for Children. A Commitment to Action: National and International Reporting ResponsibilitiesA Commitment to Action: National and International Reporting Responsibilities The governments that signed the Millennium Declaration and the World Fit for Children Declaration and Plan of Action The governments that signed the Millennium Declaration and the World Fit for Children Declaration and Plan of Action also committed themselves to monitoring progress towards the goals and objectives they contained: also committed themselves to monitoring progress towards the goals and objectives they contained: “We will monitor regularly at the national level and, where appropriate, at the regional level and assess progress “We will monitor regularly at the national level and, where appropriate, at the regional level and assess progress towards the goals and targets of the present Plan of Action at the national, regional and global levels. Accordingly, towards the goals and targets of the present Plan of Action at the national, regional and global levels. Accordingly, we will strengthen our national statistical capacity to collect, analyse and disaggregate data, including by sex, age and we will strengthen our national statistical capacity to collect, analyse and disaggregate data, including by sex, age and other relevant factors that may lead to disparities, and support a wide range of child-focused research. We will enhance other relevant factors that may lead to disparities, and support a wide range of child-focused research. We will enhance international cooperation to support statistical capacity-building efforts and build community capacity for monitoring, international cooperation to support statistical capacity-building efforts and build community capacity for monitoring, assessment and planning.” (assessment and planning.” (A World Fit for ChildrenA World Fit for Children, paragraph 60), paragraph 60) “…We will conduct periodic reviews at the national and subnational levels of progress in order to address obstacles more “…We will conduct periodic reviews at the national and subnational levels of progress in order to address obstacles more effectively and accelerate actions…” (effectively and accelerate actions…” (A World Fit for ChildrenA World Fit for Children, paragraph 61), paragraph 61) The Plan of Action (paragraph 61) also calls for the specific involvement of UNICEF in the preparation of periodic The Plan of Action (paragraph 61) also calls for the specific involvement of UNICEF in the preparation of periodic progress reports:progress reports: “… As the world’s lead agency for children, the United Nations Children’s Fund is requested to continue to prepare “… As the world’s lead agency for children, the United Nations Children’s Fund is requested to continue to prepare and disseminate, in close collaboration with Governments, relevant funds, programmes and the specialized agencies and disseminate, in close collaboration with Governments, relevant funds, programmes and the specialized agencies of the United Nations system, and all other relevant actors, as appropriate, information on the progress made in the of the United Nations system, and all other relevant actors, as appropriate, information on the progress made in the implementation of the Declaration and the Plan of Action.”implementation of the Declaration and the Plan of Action.” Similarly, the Similarly, the Millennium DeclarationMillennium Declaration (paragraph 31) calls for periodic reporting on progress: (paragraph 31) calls for periodic reporting on progress: “…We request the General Assembly to review on a regular basis the progress made in implementing the provisions of “…We request the General Assembly to review on a regular basis the progress made in implementing the provisions of this Declaration, and ask the Secretary-General to issue periodic reports for consideration by the General Assembly and this Declaration, and ask the Secretary-General to issue periodic reports for consideration by the General Assembly and as a basis for further action.”as a basis for further action.” MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201024 In signing these international agreements, governments In signing these international agreements, governments committed themselves to improving conditions for their committed themselves to improving conditions for their children and to monitoring progress towards that end. children and to monitoring progress towards that end. UNICEF was assigned a supporting role in this task. UNICEF was assigned a supporting role in this task. (See the table on the previous page).(See the table on the previous page). In Serbia, commitment to these international priorities In Serbia, commitment to these international priorities has been demonstrated through development and has been demonstrated through development and implementation of national strategies and plans, namely implementation of national strategies and plans, namely the Poverty Reduction Strategy (2003), the National the Poverty Reduction Strategy (2003), the National Plan of Action for Children (2004) and the National Plan of Action for Children (2004) and the National Millennium Development Goals (2006). Plans for Millennium Development Goals (2006). Plans for integration into the European Union have included integration into the European Union have included social inclusion and poverty reduction as important social inclusion and poverty reduction as important components of Serbia’s EU integration policy.components of Serbia’s EU integration policy. All these policy frameworks require monitoring and All these policy frameworks require monitoring and assessment of progress. The fourth round of the Multiple assessment of progress. The fourth round of the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey represents a large source of data Indicator Cluster Survey represents a large source of data for reporting on progress towards the aforementioned goals. for reporting on progress towards the aforementioned goals. The survey provides a rich foundation of comparative data The survey provides a rich foundation of comparative data for comprehensive progress reporting, especially regarding for comprehensive progress reporting, especially regarding the situation of the most vulnerable children (children in the situation of the most vulnerable children (children in the poorest households, Roma children or those living in the poorest households, Roma children or those living in rural areas). It also provides important information for the rural areas). It also provides important information for the new UNICEF Country Programme 2011–2015 as well as new UNICEF Country Programme 2011–2015 as well as the UNDAF 2011–2015.the UNDAF 2011–2015. This final report presents the results of the indicators and This final report presents the results of the indicators and topics covered in the survey. topics covered in the survey. Survey ObjectivesSurvey Objectives The 2010 Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey The 2010 Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) (MICS) has as its primary objectives:has as its primary objectives:  To provide up-to-date information on the situation To provide up-to-date information on the situation of children, women and men in Serbia;of children, women and men in Serbia;  To furnish the data needed for monitoring To furnish the data needed for monitoring progress toward goals established in the Millennium progress toward goals established in the Millennium Declaration and other internationally and nationally Declaration and other internationally and nationally agreed goals, and to act as a basis for future action;agreed goals, and to act as a basis for future action;  To contribute to the improvement of data and To contribute to the improvement of data and monitoring systems in Serbia and to strengthen monitoring systems in Serbia and to strengthen technical expertise in the design, implementation, technical expertise in the design, implementation, and analysis of such systemsand analysis of such systems.  To generate data on the situation of children, women To generate data on the situation of children, women and men, including the identification of vulnerable and men, including the identification of vulnerable groups and of disparities, which will inform social groups and of disparities, which will inform social inclusion and poverty reduction policies and inclusion and poverty reduction policies and interventions.interventions. MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 25 The MICS4 was carried in Serbia on two samples — a The MICS4 was carried in Serbia on two samples — a national sample representative of the whole population of national sample representative of the whole population of Serbia (refer to Serbia sample); and a Roma Settlements Serbia (refer to Serbia sample); and a Roma Settlements sample representative of the population living in Roma sample representative of the population living in Roma settlements in Serbia. Individual samples and their settlements in Serbia. Individual samples and their technical characteristics will be described separately in technical characteristics will be described separately in the relevant parts of the report.the relevant parts of the report. Elements of the survey methodology that were Elements of the survey methodology that were common for both samples, as well as survey findings common for both samples, as well as survey findings will be presented jointly to avoid repetition. will be presented jointly to avoid repetition. Sample DesignSample Design of the Serbia Sampleof the Serbia Sample The national sample for the Serbia Multiple Indicator The national sample for the Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was designed to provide estimates Cluster Survey (MICS) was designed to provide estimates for a large number of indicators on the situation of for a large number of indicators on the situation of children, women and young men at the national level, children, women and young men at the national level, for urban and rural areas, and for 4 regions: Belgrade, for urban and rural areas, and for 4 regions: Belgrade, Vojvodina, Sumadija and Western Serbia, and Southern Vojvodina, Sumadija and Western Serbia, and Southern and Eastern Serbia. The urban and rural domains within and Eastern Serbia. The urban and rural domains within 25 Areas were identified as the main sampling strata 25 Areas were identified as the main sampling strata and the sample was selected in two stages. Within each and the sample was selected in two stages. Within each stratum, a specified number of census enumeration stratum, a specified number of census enumeration areas were selected systematically with probability areas were selected systematically with probability proportional to size. After a household listing was proportional to size. After a household listing was carried out within the selected enumeration areas, the carried out within the selected enumeration areas, the listed households were divided into households with listed households were divided into households with and without children under 5, and a separate systematic and without children under 5, and a separate systematic sample of households was selected for each group. At the sample of households was selected for each group. At the national level a total of 6885 households were selected: national level a total of 6885 households were selected: 3650 households with children and 3235 households 3650 households with children and 3235 households IIII SAMPLE AND SURVEY SAMPLE AND SURVEY METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY without children. The Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster without children. The Serbia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey sample is not self-weighting. For reporting of Survey sample is not self-weighting. For reporting of national level results, sample weights were used. A more national level results, sample weights were used. A more detailed description of the sample design can be found detailed description of the sample design can be found in Appendix A.in Appendix A. Sample Design of theSample Design of the Roma Settlements SampleRoma Settlements Sample The sample for Roma settlements for the Multiple The sample for Roma settlements for the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was designed to Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was designed to provide estimates for a large number of indicators on provide estimates for a large number of indicators on the situation of children, women and young men in the situation of children, women and young men in Roma settlements, at the Serbia level and for urban Roma settlements, at the Serbia level and for urban and rural areas. The urban and rural areas within each and rural areas. The urban and rural areas within each of three territories (Belgrade, Central Serbia without of three territories (Belgrade, Central Serbia without Belgrade, and Vojvodina) were identified as the main Belgrade, and Vojvodina) were identified as the main sampling strata and the sample was selected in two sampling strata and the sample was selected in two stages. Within each stratum, a specified number of stages. Within each stratum, a specified number of enumeration areas were selected systematically with enumeration areas were selected systematically with probability proportional to size. After a household listing probability proportional to size. After a household listing was carried out within the selected enumeration areas, was carried out within the selected enumeration areas, the listed households were divided into households with the listed households were divided into households with and without children under 5, and a separate systematic and without children under 5, and a separate systematic sample of households was selected for each group. A total sample of households was selected for each group. A total of 1815 Roma households were selected: 1311 households of 1815 Roma households were selected: 1311 households with children and 504 households without children. The with children and 504 households without children. The Roma settlements Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey Roma settlements Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey sample is not self-weighting. For reporting the results, sample is not self-weighting. For reporting the results, sample weights were used. A more detailed description sample weights were used. A more detailed description of the sample design can be found in Appendix A.of the sample design can be found in Appendix A. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201026 QuestionnairesQuestionnaires Four sets of questionnaires were used in the survey for Four sets of questionnaires were used in the survey for both samples: 1) a household questionnaire which was both samples: 1) a household questionnaire which was used to collect information on all used to collect information on all de jurede jure household household members (usual residents), the household, and the members (usual residents), the household, and the dwelling; 2) a women’s questionnaire administered in dwelling; 2) a women’s questionnaire administered in each household to all women aged between 15–49 years; each household to all women aged between 15–49 years; 3) an under-5 questionnaire, administered to mothers or 3) an under-5 questionnaire, administered to mothers or primary caretakers for all children under 5 living in the primary caretakers for all children under 5 living in the household; and 4) a men’s questionnaire administered in household; and 4) a men’s questionnaire administered in each household to all men aged 15–29 years. each household to all men aged 15–29 years. The Household Questionnaire included the following The Household Questionnaire included the following modules:modules:  Household Listing Form Household Listing Form  Education Education  Water and Sanitation Water and Sanitation  Household Characteristics Household Characteristics  Child Discipline Child Discipline  Handwashing Handwashing The Questionnaire for Individual Women was The Questionnaire for Individual Women was administered to all women aged 15–49 years living in the administered to all women aged 15–49 years living in the households, and included the following modules:households, and included the following modules:  Woman’s Background Woman’s Background  Access to Mass Media and ICT Access to Mass Media and ICT  Child Mortality Child Mortality  Desire for Last Birth Desire for Last Birth  Maternal and Newborn Health — only selected Maternal and Newborn Health — only selected questionsquestions  Illness Symptoms Illness Symptoms  Contraception Contraception  Unmet Need Unmet Need  Attitudes Toward Domestic Violence Attitudes Toward Domestic Violence  Marriage/Union Marriage/Union  Sexual Behaviour Sexual Behaviour  HIV/AIDS HIV/AIDS  Life satisfaction Life satisfaction The Questionnaire for Children Under Five was The Questionnaire for Children Under Five was administered to mothers or caretakers of children under administered to mothers or caretakers of children under 5 years of age5 years of age1 living in the households. Normally, the living in the households. Normally, the questionnaire was administered to mothers of under-5 questionnaire was administered to mothers of under-5 children; in cases when the mother was not listed in the children; in cases when the mother was not listed in the household roster, a primary caretaker for the child was household roster, a primary caretaker for the child was identified and interviewed. The questionnaire included identified and interviewed. The questionnaire included the following modules:the following modules:  Child’s Age Child’s Age  Birth Registration Birth Registration  Early Childhood Development Early Childhood Development  Breastfeeding Breastfeeding  Care of Illness Care of Illness  Anthropometry Anthropometry The Questionnaire for Individual Men was administered The Questionnaire for Individual Men was administered to all men aged 15–29 years living in the households, and to all men aged 15–29 years living in the households, and included the following modules:included the following modules:  Man’s Background Man’s Background  Access to Mass Media and ICT Access to Mass Media and ICT  Marriage/Union Marriage/Union  Contraception Contraception  Attitudes Toward Domestic Violence Attitudes Toward Domestic Violence  Sexual Behaviour Sexual Behaviour  HIV/AIDS HIV/AIDS  Life satisfaction Life satisfaction The questionnaires are based on the MICS4 model The questionnaires are based on the MICS4 model questionnairequestionnaire2. From the MICS4 model English version, . From the MICS4 model English version, the questionnaires were translated into Serbian and were the questionnaires were translated into Serbian and were 1 The terms “children under 5”, “children aged 0–4 years”, and “children aged 0–59 months” are used interchangeably in this report. 2 The model MICS4 questionnaires can be found at www.childinfo.org MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 27 pre-tested in Belgrade during September 2010. Based on pre-tested in Belgrade during September 2010. Based on the results of the pre-test, modifications were made to the the results of the pre-test, modifications were made to the wording and translation of the questionnaires. A copy of the wording and translation of the questionnaires. A copy of the Serbia MICS4 questionnaires is provided in Appendix F.Serbia MICS4 questionnaires is provided in Appendix F. In addition to the administration of questionnaires, In addition to the administration of questionnaires, fieldwork teams observed the place for hand-washing and fieldwork teams observed the place for hand-washing and measured the weights and heights of children aged under measured the weights and heights of children aged under 5 years. Details and findings of these measurements are 5 years. Details and findings of these measurements are provided in the respective sections of the report.provided in the respective sections of the report. Training and FieldworkTraining and Fieldwork Training for the fieldwork editors was conducted for Training for the fieldwork editors was conducted for 7 days in September 2010, and training for the total 7 days in September 2010, and training for the total fieldwork staff was conducted for 10 days in October fieldwork staff was conducted for 10 days in October 2010. Training included lectures on interviewing 2010. Training included lectures on interviewing techniques and the contents of the questionnaires, techniques and the contents of the questionnaires, and mock interviews between trainees to gain practice and mock interviews between trainees to gain practice in asking questions. Towards the end of the training in asking questions. Towards the end of the training period, trainees spent 2 days in practice interviewing period, trainees spent 2 days in practice interviewing in urban and rural areas of Valjevo, Osecina and in urban and rural areas of Valjevo, Osecina and Mionica municipalities during October 2010. Mionica municipalities during October 2010. The data from the Serbia sample were collected by 15 The data from the Serbia sample were collected by 15 teams; each was comprised of 2 female interviewers, one teams; each was comprised of 2 female interviewers, one female editor, one male interviewer/measurer/driver and female editor, one male interviewer/measurer/driver and a supervisor. a supervisor. The data from the Roma settlements sample were The data from the Roma settlements sample were collected by 3 teams. Each team was comprised of collected by 3 teams. Each team was comprised of 2 female Roma interviewers, one female editor, one 2 female Roma interviewers, one female editor, one male interviewer/measurer/driver and a supervisor. male interviewer/measurer/driver and a supervisor. Fieldwork began in November 2010 and concluded in Fieldwork began in November 2010 and concluded in December 2010.December 2010. Data ProcessingData Processing Data was entered using the CSPro software. The data Data was entered using the CSPro software. The data entry was carried out on 10 microcomputers by 20 entry was carried out on 10 microcomputers by 20 data entry operators and 4 data entry supervisors. In data entry operators and 4 data entry supervisors. In order to ensure quality control, all questionnaires were order to ensure quality control, all questionnaires were double entered and internal consistency checks were double entered and internal consistency checks were performed. Procedures and standard programmes performed. Procedures and standard programmes developed under the global MICS4 programme and developed under the global MICS4 programme and adapted to Serbia’s questionnaire were used throughout. adapted to Serbia’s questionnaire were used throughout. Data processing began simultaneously with data Data processing began simultaneously with data collection and was completed in March 2011. Data collection and was completed in March 2011. Data was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software programme, Version 18, and Sciences (SPSS) software programme, Version 18, and the model syntax and tabulation plans developed by the model syntax and tabulation plans developed by UNICEF were used for this purpose.UNICEF were used for this purpose. The Report Structure The Report Structure As noted before, this report actually presents findings As noted before, this report actually presents findings from the MICS4 surveys carried out on two samples. from the MICS4 surveys carried out on two samples. Although they can be interpreted as two independent Although they can be interpreted as two independent surveys, a decision was made to present findings in the surveys, a decision was made to present findings in the joint report to make use of, and comparison between, joint report to make use of, and comparison between, data easier. data easier. Each subchapter starts with a common introduction. Each subchapter starts with a common introduction. After that, there are explanations that refer to the After that, there are explanations that refer to the Serbia sample and to the Roma settlements sample Serbia sample and to the Roma settlements sample findings. In order to visually differentiate findings findings. In order to visually differentiate findings coming from the two samples, the parts of the Report coming from the two samples, the parts of the Report that describe findings from Roma settlements are that describe findings from Roma settlements are shaded in a different colour.shaded in a different colour. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201028 How to Read the TablesHow to Read the Tables Some of the data collected by the questionnaires are not Some of the data collected by the questionnaires are not shown in the tables or presented in this Report for the shown in the tables or presented in this Report for the following reasons:following reasons:  Small number of cases (less than 25 unweighted cases) Small number of cases (less than 25 unweighted cases) per disaggregation categoryper disaggregation category  The education category “None” within Serbia The education category “None” within Serbia Sample (except in HH tables)Sample (except in HH tables) Note:  (M) — letter M after a Table/Figure code indicates that it refers only to the Men’s population (M) — letter M after a Table/Figure code indicates that it refers only to the Men’s population  (R) — letter R after a Table/Figure code indicates that it refers only to the Roma settlements sample (R) — letter R after a Table/Figure code indicates that it refers only to the Roma settlements sample  (*) — an asterisk in tables indicates that the percentage or proportion has been suppressed because it is based (*) — an asterisk in tables indicates that the percentage or proportion has been suppressed because it is based on fewer than 25 unweighted caseson fewer than 25 unweighted cases  ( (numbernumber) — figure in parenthesis indicate that the percentage or proportion is based on just 25 to 49 ) — figure in parenthesis indicate that the percentage or proportion is based on just 25 to 49 unweighted cases and should be treated with cautionunweighted cases and should be treated with caution  The education category “Higher” within Roma The education category “Higher” within Roma settlements Sample (except in HH tables)settlements Sample (except in HH tables)  Ethnicity of the head of household, within both Ethnicity of the head of household, within both samples (except in HH tables)samples (except in HH tables)  Customised Serbia-specific indicators are not included Customised Serbia-specific indicators are not included as they are not part of the global report template. as they are not part of the global report template. They will be included in MICS4 Report in the Serbian They will be included in MICS4 Report in the Serbian language.language. MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 29 Sample CoverageSample Coverage Of the 6885 households selected for the sample, Of the 6885 households selected for the sample, 6803 were found to be occupied. Of these, 6392 were 6803 were found to be occupied. Of these, 6392 were successfully interviewed for a household response rate successfully interviewed for a household response rate of 94 percent. In the interviewed households, 5797 of 94 percent. In the interviewed households, 5797 women (aged between 15–49 years) were identified. women (aged between 15–49 years) were identified. Of these, 5385 were successfully interviewed, yielding Of these, 5385 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 93 percent within interviewed a response rate of 93 percent within interviewed households. In addition, 3398 children under five years households. In addition, 3398 children under five years of age were listed in the household questionnaires. of age were listed in the household questionnaires. Questionnaires were completed for 3374 of these Questionnaires were completed for 3374 of these children, which corresponds to a response rate of children, which corresponds to a response rate of 99 percent within interviewed households. In the 99 percent within interviewed households. In the interviewed households, 1938 men (aged between interviewed households, 1938 men (aged between 15–29 years) were identified. Of these, 1583 were 15–29 years) were identified. Of these, 1583 were IIIAIIIA SERBIA SAMPLE SERBIA SAMPLE COVERAGE AND THE COVERAGE AND THE CHARACTERISTICSCHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDSOF HOUSEHOLDS AND RESPONDENTSAND RESPONDENTS successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 82 percent within interviewed households. Overall 82 percent within interviewed households. Overall response rates of 87, 93 and 77 percent respectively response rates of 87, 93 and 77 percent respectively are calculated for the women’s, under-5’s and men’s are calculated for the women’s, under-5’s and men’s interviews (Table HH.1).interviews (Table HH.1). Response rates across regions and areas were as Response rates across regions and areas were as expected — characterised by lower response rates in expected — characterised by lower response rates in urban areas (about 92 percent) and in particular in urban areas (about 92 percent) and in particular in Belgrade (about 88 percent). Lower response rates in Belgrade (about 88 percent). Lower response rates in urban areas were compensated for in the sample design urban areas were compensated for in the sample design by a higher number of allocated enumeration areas by a higher number of allocated enumeration areas (and households) to them. The response rates for men (and households) to them. The response rates for men were much lower compared to women and children. were much lower compared to women and children. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201030 Table HH.1: Results of household, women’s, men’s and under-5 interviews, Serbia, 2010 Number of households, women, men, and children under 5 by results of the household, women’s, men’s and under-5’s interviews, and household, women’s, men’s and under-5’s response rates Area Region Urban Rural Belgrade Vojvodina Sumadija and Western Serbia Southern and Eastern Serbia Total Households Sampled 4216 2669 1611 1918 1876 1480 6885 Occupied 4154 2649 1582 1903 1861 1457 6803 Interviewed 3836 2556 1399 1800 1788 1405 6392 Household response rate 92.3 96.5 88.4 94.6 96.1 96.4 94.0 Women  Eligible 3397 2400 1179 1589 1719 1310 5797 Interviewed 3153 2232 1066 1503 1571 1245 5385 Women’s response rate 92.8 93.0 90.4 94.6 91.4 95.0 92.9 Women’s overall response rate 85.7 89.7 80.0 89.5 87.8 91.6 87.3 Men  Eligible 1104 834 390 514 559 475 1938 Interviewed 909 674 336 406 448 393 1583 Men’s response rate 82.3 80.8 86.2 79.0 80.1 82.7 81.7 Men’s overall response rate 76.0 78.0 76.2 74.7 77.0 79.8 76.7 Children under 5  Eligible 1928 1470 606 1062 1011 719 3398 Mothers/caretakers interviewed 1916 1458 593 1057 1009 715 3374 Under-5’s response rate 99.4 99.2 97.9 99.5 99.8 99.4 99.3 Under-5’s overall response rate 91.8 95.7 86.5 94.1 95.9 95.9 93.3 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 31 Characteristics of HouseholdsCharacteristics of Households The weighted age and sex distribution of the survey The weighted age and sex distribution of the survey population is provided in Table HH.2. The distribution population is provided in Table HH.2. The distribution is also used to produce the population pyramid in Figure is also used to produce the population pyramid in Figure HH.1. In the 6392 households successfully interviewed HH.1. In the 6392 households successfully interviewed in the survey, 20874 household members were listed. in the survey, 20874 household members were listed. Of these, 10134 were males, and 10740 were females. Of these, 10134 were males, and 10740 were females. Table HH.2: Household age distribution by sex, Serbia, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of the household population by five-year age groups, dependency age groups, and by child (age 0–17 years) and adult populations (age 18 or more), by sex   Males Females Total Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Age 0–4 664 6.6 670 6.2 1335 6.4 5–9 510 5.0 549 5.1 1059 5.1 10–14 503 5.0 449 4.2 951 4.6 15–19 567 5.6 595 5.5 1162 5.6 20–24 700 6.9 700 6.5 1400 6.7 25–29 756 7.5 763 7.1 1518 7.3 30–34 734 7.2 681 6.3 1415 6.8 35–39 746 7.4 703 6.5 1449 6.9 40–44 573 5.7 610 5.7 1183 5.7 45–49 667 6.6 778 7.2 1445 6.9 50–54 766 7.6 729 6.8 1494 7.2 55–59 812 8.0 856 8.0 1668 8.0 60–64 701 6.9 698 6.5 1400 6.7 65–69 421 4.2 522 4.9 943 4.5 70–74 435 4.3 585 5.4 1020 4.9 75–79 307 3.0 466 4.3 773 3.7 80–84 190 1.9 255 2.4 445 2.1 85+ 75 .7 126 1.2 201 1.0 Missing/DK 6 .1 6 .1 11 .1 Dependency age groups  0–14 1677 16.5 1668 15.5 3345 16.0 15–64 7023 69.3 7112 66.2 14136 67.7 65+ 1428 14.1 1955 18.2 3382 16.2 Missing/DK 6 .1 6 .1 11 .1 Child and adult populations  Children age 0–17 years 2006 19.8 2009 18.7 4015 19.2 Adults age 18+ years 8121 80.1 8726 81.2 16847 80.7 Missing/DK 6 .1 6 .1 11 .1 Total 10134 100.0 10740 100.0 20874 100.0 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201032 The age and sex distribution of the MICS4 survey for The age and sex distribution of the MICS4 survey for 5-years-groups, is in accordance with the demographic 5-years-groups, is in accordance with the demographic estimates based on the vital statistics for 2010. Only estimates based on the vital statistics for 2010. Only children under 5 (6.4 percent) exceed national estimates by children under 5 (6.4 percent) exceed national estimates by 1.6 percent. Age distribution indicates negative population 1.6 percent. Age distribution indicates negative population growth. The proportion of children aged 0–14 in the growth. The proportion of children aged 0–14 in the overall population is the same as the proportion aged 65+ overall population is the same as the proportion aged 65+ (16 percent). Serbia is characterized by a low proportion (16 percent). Serbia is characterized by a low proportion of children aged under-five and a high proportion of the of children aged under-five and a high proportion of the elderly. Children up to 18 years of age constitute 19 percent elderly. Children up to 18 years of age constitute 19 percent of the population. The strongest prevailing group is the of the population. The strongest prevailing group is the 55–59 age-group (8 percent). The male-female ratio shows 55–59 age-group (8 percent). The male-female ratio shows small variations in the first 60 years of life after which it small variations in the first 60 years of life after which it decreases and the number of women exceeds that of men.decreases and the number of women exceeds that of men. Tables HH.3–HH.5 provide basic information on the Tables HH.3–HH.5 provide basic information on the households, female respondents aged 15–49, male households, female respondents aged 15–49, male respondents aged 15–29, and children under-5 by respondents aged 15–29, and children under-5 by presenting the unweighted, as well as the weighted presenting the unweighted, as well as the weighted numbers. Information on the basic characteristics numbers. Information on the basic characteristics of households, women, men and children under-5 of households, women, men and children under-5 interviewed in the survey is essential for the interpretation interviewed in the survey is essential for the interpretation of findings presented later in the report and also can of findings presented later in the report and also can provide an indication of the provide an indication of the representativeness of the representativeness of the survey. The remaining tables in this report are presented survey. The remaining tables in this report are presented only with weighted numbers. See Appendix A for more only with weighted numbers. See Appendix A for more details about the weighting.details about the weighting. Table HH.3: Household composition, Serbia, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of households by selected characteristics Weighted percent Number of households Weighted Unweighted Sex of household head  Male 71.7 4583 4859 Female 28.3 1809 1533 Region Belgrade 21.5 1376 1399 Vojvodina 27.9 1784 1800 Sumadija and Western Serbia 27.0 1727 1788 Southern and Eastern Serbia 23.6 1506 1405 Area Urban 58.5 3741 3836 Rural 41.5 2651 2556 Number of household members 1 17.0 1089 678 2 22.2 1422 955 3 18.4 1176 1174 4 20.3 1297 1449 5 10.3 658 925 6 7.7 490 729 7 2.6 169 278 8 .8 53 113 9 .3 17 43 10+ .3 21 48 Education of household head  None 2.8 180 130 Primary 31.8 2035 1807 Secondary 45.2 2888 3166 Higher 20.1 1285 1286 Ethnicity of household head  Serbian 87.3 5581 5601 Hungarian 4.7 298 254 Bosnian 1.6 105 117 Roma 1.5 95 102 Other 3.9 251 250 Doesn’t want to declare 1.0 61 67 Total 100.0 6392 6392 Households with at least  One child age 0–4 years 16.7 6392 6392 One child age 0–17 years 37.4 6392 6392 One woman age 15–49 years 56.6 6392 6392 One man age 15–29 years 26.2 6392 6392 Mean household size 3.3 6392 6392 Figure HH.1: Age and sex distribution of household population, Serbia, 2010 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 33 Table HH.3 provides basic background information Table HH.3 provides basic background information on the households. Within households, the sex of on the households. Within households, the sex of the household head, region, residence, number of the household head, region, residence, number of household members, the education and ethnicityhousehold members, the education and ethnicity3 of the household head are shown in the table. These of the household head are shown in the table. These background characteristics are used in subsequent background characteristics are used in subsequent tables in this report. The figures in the table are also tables in this report. The figures in the table are also intended to show the numbers of observations by intended to show the numbers of observations by major categories of analysis in the report.major categories of analysis in the report. The weighted and unweighted numbers of households The weighted and unweighted numbers of households are equal, since sample weights were normalized (See are equal, since sample weights were normalized (See Appendix A). The table also shows the proportions of Appendix A). The table also shows the proportions of households with at least one child under 18, at least households with at least one child under 18, at least one child under 5, at least one eligible woman aged one child under 5, at least one eligible woman aged between 15–49, and at least one eligible man aged between 15–49, and at least one eligible man aged between 15–29. The table also shows the weighted between 15–29. The table also shows the weighted average household size estimated by the survey.average household size estimated by the survey. The gender structure for heads of households is The gender structure for heads of households is almost the same, when comparing Census 2002 and almost the same, when comparing Census 2002 and MICS 2010 data. Namely, 27 percent were women MICS 2010 data. Namely, 27 percent were women heads of household in 2002 and 28 percent in 2010. heads of household in 2002 and 28 percent in 2010. About 59 percent of households are urban, while the About 59 percent of households are urban, while the rest are rural. The regional distribution is similar to rest are rural. The regional distribution is similar to the Census data. The Vojvodina region comprises the the Census data. The Vojvodina region comprises the largest number of households with nearly one third largest number of households with nearly one third of the total, while the smallest number of households of the total, while the smallest number of households is in Belgrade (about 21 percent). The majority of is in Belgrade (about 21 percent). The majority of households have two to four members (61 percent). In households have two to four members (61 percent). In 57 percent of interviewed households, there is at least 57 percent of interviewed households, there is at least one woman aged between 15–49, and in 26 percent, one woman aged between 15–49, and in 26 percent, a man aged between 15–29 years. In 17 percent of a man aged between 15–29 years. In 17 percent of 3 This was determined by asking the respondents what ethnic group the head of household belonged to. 4 Throughout this report, unless otherwise stated, “education” refers to the educational level attained by the respondent, when it is used as a background variable. 5 A principal components analysis was performed by using information on the ownership of consumer goods, dwelling characteristics, water and sanitation, and other characteristics that are related to the household’s wealth to assign weights (factor scores) to each of the household’s assets. Each household was then assigned a wealth score based on these weights and the assets owned by that household. The survey household population was then ranked according to the wealth score of the household they are living in, and was finally divided into 5 equal parts (quintiles) from lowest (poorest) to highest (richest). The assets used in these calculations were as follows: type of water and sanitation, number of rooms for sleeping per member; main material of dwelling floor, roof and exterior walls; the type of fuel used for cooking; presence in the household of electricity, radio, television, non-mobile telephone, refrigerator, electric stove, bed, table with chairs, vacuum cleaner, PC/Laptop, closet, washing machine, drying machine, air conditioner, jacuzzi tub and video monitoring system; possesion by household members of watch, mobile telephone, bicycle, motorcycle or scooter, animal-drawn cart, car or truck, boat with motor, tractor; and ownership of bank accounts by members of the household. The wealth index is assumed to capture the underlying long-term wealth through information on the household assets, and is intended to produce a ranking of households by wealth, from poorest to richest. The wealth index does not provide information on absolute poverty, current income or expenditure levels. The wealth scores calculated are applicable for only the particular data set they are based on. Further information on the construction of the wealth index can be found in Filmer, D. and Pritchett, L., 2001. “Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data — or tears: An application to educational enrolments in states of India”. Demography 38(1): 115–132. Gwatkin, D. R., Rutstein, S., Johnson, K., Pande, R. and Wagstaff. A., 2000. Socio-Economic Differences in Health, Nutrition, and Population. HNP/Poverty Thematic Group, Washington, DC: World Bank. Rutstein, S. O. and Johnson, K., 2004. The DHS Wealth Index. DHS Comparative Reports No. 6. Calverton, Maryland: ORC Macro. interviewed households there is at least one child interviewed households there is at least one child under 5 years of age and in 37 percent, a child under under 5 years of age and in 37 percent, a child under 18 years. The survey estimated the average household 18 years. The survey estimated the average household size at 3.3 persons.size at 3.3 persons. Characteristics of Female Characteristics of Female Respondents Respondents 15–49 Years of Age, 15–49 Years of Age, Male Respondents Male Respondents 15–29 Years of Age and Children Under-5 15–29 Years of Age and Children Under-5 Tables HH.4, HH.4M and HH.5 provide information on Tables HH.4, HH.4M and HH.5 provide information on the background characteristics of female respondents the background characteristics of female respondents between 15–49 years of age, men between 15–29 between 15–49 years of age, men between 15–29 years of age, and of children aged under-5. In all years of age, and of children aged under-5. In all tables, the total numbers of weighted and unweighted tables, the total numbers of weighted and unweighted observations are equal, since sample weights have been observations are equal, since sample weights have been normalized (standardized). In addition to providing normalized (standardized). In addition to providing useful information on the background characteristics of useful information on the background characteristics of women, men and children, the tables are also intended women, men and children, the tables are also intended to show the numbers of observations in each background to show the numbers of observations in each background category. These categories are used in the subsequent category. These categories are used in the subsequent tabulations of this report.tabulations of this report. Table HH.4 provides the background characteristics of Table HH.4 provides the background characteristics of female respondents between 15–49 years of age. The female respondents between 15–49 years of age. The table includes information on the distribution of women table includes information on the distribution of women according to region, residence, age, marital status, according to region, residence, age, marital status, motherhood status, births in the two years preceding the motherhood status, births in the two years preceding the survey, educationsurvey, education4, wealth index quintiles, wealth index quintiles5, and ethnicity , and ethnicity of the head of household. of the head of household. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201034 Weighted percent Number of women Weighted Unweighted Region  Belgrade 21.2 1142 1066 Vojvodina 25.5 1376 1503 Sumadija and Western Serbia 28.2 1517 1571 Southern and Eastern Serbia 25.1 1351 1245 Area  Urban 58.6 3155 3153 Rural 41.4 2230 2232 Age  15–19 12.2 659 427 20–24 13.1 705 679 25–29 15.7 846 1201 30–34 14.4 775 1144 35–39 14.7 791 841 40–44 13.1 703 497 45–49 16.8 905 596 Marital/Union status  Currently married/in union 63.2 3405 4055 Formerly married/in union 6.0 325 302 Never married/in union 30.7 1655 1028 Motherhood status  Ever gave birth 64.2 3459 4216 Never gave birth 35.8 1926 1169 Weighted percent Number of women Weighted Unweighted Births in last two years  Yes 10.1 543 1187 No 89.9 4842 4198 Education  None .5 27 25 Primary 13.1 704 727 Secondary 57.0 3067 3120 Higher 29.5 1587 1513 Wealth index quintile  Poorest 13.9 750 783 Second 19.8 1066 1011 Middle 20.0 1080 1052 Fourth 22.6 1217 1193 Richest 23.6 1273 1346 Ethnicity of household head  Serbian 88.0 4739 4696 Hungarian 3.9 208 200 Bosnian 2.2 119 119 Roma 2.5 132 135 Other 2.8 150 185 Doesn’t want to declare .7 38 50 Total 100.0 5385 5385 Table HH.4: Women’s background characteristics, Serbia, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of women age 15–49 years by selected background characteristics Approximately, 28 percent of interviewed eligible women Approximately, 28 percent of interviewed eligible women live in Sumadia and Western Serbia, and 21 percent in live in Sumadia and Western Serbia, and 21 percent in Belgrade. Distribution among the other two regions is Belgrade. Distribution among the other two regions is equal. This pattern is expected and follows demographics equal. This pattern is expected and follows demographics estimates based on the vital statistics for 2010. The estimates based on the vital statistics for 2010. The proportion of young women is lower, with 12 percent proportion of young women is lower, with 12 percent in the 15–19 years age group. Around 63 percent of in the 15–19 years age group. Around 63 percent of all women in this sample are currently married, while all women in this sample are currently married, while 31 percent have never been married. Distribution by 31 percent have never been married. Distribution by motherhood status is similar: 64 percent of women have motherhood status is similar: 64 percent of women have given birth, compared to 36 percent that have never given birth, compared to 36 percent that have never given birth. The majority of interviewed women have given birth. The majority of interviewed women have secondary education (57 percent), while the proportion secondary education (57 percent), while the proportion of women with no education is 0.5 percent, and with of women with no education is 0.5 percent, and with only primary education is 13 percent. Those with higher only primary education is 13 percent. Those with higher education constitute approximately 30 percent. As far education constitute approximately 30 percent. As far as wealth index quintiles are concerned, fewer women as wealth index quintiles are concerned, fewer women live in households within the poorest quintile — about live in households within the poorest quintile — about 14 percent — while 20 to 24 percent of women live in the 14 percent — while 20 to 24 percent of women live in the households within the remaining wealth quintiles.households within the remaining wealth quintiles. MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 35 Weighted percent Number of men Weighted Unweighted Region Belgrade 20.2 319 336 Vojvodina 25.8 408 406 Sumadija and Western Serbia 28.3 448 448 Southern and Eastern Serbia 25.8 408 393 Area  Urban 57.4 908 909 Rural 42.6 675 674 Age  15–19 29.4 465 346 20–24 32.3 512 444 25–29 38.3 606 793 Marital/Union status  Currently married/in union 18.3 290 572 Formerly married/in union 1.2 19 17 Never married/in union 80.5 1274 994 Education  None .1 2 6 Primary 7.6 120 159 Secondary 65.2 1032 1063 Higher 27.1 429 355     Weighted percent Number of men Weighted Unweighted Wealth index quintile  Poorest 14.9 235 255 Second 20.6 326 317 Middle 20.3 321 301 Fourth 21.1 334 345 Richest 23.2 367 365 Ethnicity of household head  Serbian 87.3 1381 1358 Hungarian 3.9 63 64 Bosnian 2.3 36 38 Roma 3.3 52 63 Other 2.4 38 48 Doesn’t want to declare .8 13 12 Total 100.0 1583 1583 Table HH.4M: Men’s background characteristics, Serbia, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of men age 15–29 years by selected background characteristics Table HH.4M provides background characteristics of Table HH.4M provides background characteristics of male respondents 15–29 years of age. The table includes male respondents 15–29 years of age. The table includes information on the distribution of men according to information on the distribution of men according to region, residence, age, marital status, education, wealth region, residence, age, marital status, education, wealth index quintiles, and ethnicity of the head of household.index quintiles, and ethnicity of the head of household. Approximately, 28 percent of interviewed eligible men Approximately, 28 percent of interviewed eligible men live in Sumadia and Western Serbia, and 20 percent in live in Sumadia and Western Serbia, and 20 percent in Belgrade. Distribution among the other two regions is Belgrade. Distribution among the other two regions is equal (about 26 percent). The predominant group in the equal (about 26 percent). The predominant group in the sample are men between 25–29 years of age, around 38 sample are men between 25–29 years of age, around 38 percent. The proportion of younger men is significantly percent. The proportion of younger men is significantly lower — there are 29 percent of men in the 15–19 years lower — there are 29 percent of men in the 15–19 years group. Around 18 percent of all men in this sample are group. Around 18 percent of all men in this sample are married, while 80 percent have never been married. The married, while 80 percent have never been married. The majority of interviewed men have secondary education majority of interviewed men have secondary education (65 percent), while the proportion of men with no (65 percent), while the proportion of men with no education is 0.1 percent, with only primary education is education is 0.1 percent, with only primary education is 8 percent, and with higher education is approximately 8 percent, and with higher education is approximately 27 percent. In accordance with the household ethnic 27 percent. In accordance with the household ethnic distribution, the majority of men live in households distribution, the majority of men live in households where the ethnicity of the head of the household is where the ethnicity of the head of the household is Serbian. The respective proportion of other ethnic Serbian. The respective proportion of other ethnic groups is under 4 percent. As for the wealth index groups is under 4 percent. As for the wealth index quintiles, fewer men aged 15–29 live in households quintiles, fewer men aged 15–29 live in households within the poorest quintile — about 15 percent — while within the poorest quintile — about 15 percent — while approximately the same number of men belongs to each approximately the same number of men belongs to each of the remaining groups (20 to 23 percent).of the remaining groups (20 to 23 percent). MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201036 Weighted percent Number of under-5 children Weighted Unweighted Sex Male 49.5 1670 1710 Female 50.5 1704 1664 Region  Belgrade 18.9 639 593 Vojvodina 29.5 994 1057 Sumadija and Western Serbia 26.8 905 1009 Southern and Eastern Serbia 24.8 836 715 Area  Urban 53.6 1810 1916 Rural 46.4 1564 1458 Age  0–5 months 8.0 271 246 6–11 months 8.5 287 313 12–23 months 19.6 661 698 24–35 months 22.2 748 710 36–47 months 19.7 663 672 48–59 months 22.0 743 735 Mother’s education*  None 1.0 33 21 Primary 14.2 480 442 Secondary 58.7 1982 1991 Higher 26.0 878 920 Weighted percent Number of under-5 children Weighted Unweighted Wealth index quintile Poorest 18.8 634 580 Second 19.5 658 603 Middle 17.8 599 637 Fourth 19.7 665 698 Richest 24.3 818 856 Ethnicity of household head  Serbian 83.8 2829 2879 Hungarian 3.4 115 126 Bosnian 3.7 125 90 Roma 3.5 117 96 Other 4.5 153 147 Doesn’t want to declare 1.0 33 36 Total 100.0 3374 3374 * Mother’s education refers to educational attainment of mothers and caretakers of children under 5. Table HH.5: Under-5’s background characteristics, Serbia, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of children under five years of age by selected characteristics Some background characteristics of children under Some background characteristics of children under 5 are presented in Table HH.5. These include the 5 are presented in Table HH.5. These include the distribution of children according to several attributes: distribution of children according to several attributes: sex, region, area of residence, age in months, mother’s sex, region, area of residence, age in months, mother’s or caretaker’s education and wealth index.or caretaker’s education and wealth index. The proportion of male and female children in The proportion of male and female children in the under-5 sample is the same — 50 percent. The the under-5 sample is the same — 50 percent. The majority of children under 5 in Serbia live in urban majority of children under 5 in Serbia live in urban areas (about 54 percent). The number of children in areas (about 54 percent). The number of children in Belgrade is smaller than expected (about 19 percent). Belgrade is smaller than expected (about 19 percent). The age distribution of children between 0–59 months The age distribution of children between 0–59 months is well balanced. The majority of children under 5 is well balanced. The majority of children under 5 (59 percent) have a mother with secondary education. (59 percent) have a mother with secondary education. More children under 5 live in households within the More children under 5 live in households within the richest wealth quintile — about 24 percent — while richest wealth quintile — about 24 percent — while approximately the same number of children belongs to approximately the same number of children belongs to each of the remaining groups (18 to 20 percent).each of the remaining groups (18 to 20 percent). MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 37 ChildrenChildren’s Living Arrangementss Living Arrangements Table HH.6 presents information on the living arrangements Table HH.6 presents information on the living arrangements and orphanhood status of children under age 18.and orphanhood status of children under age 18. Table HH.6: Children’s living arrangements and orphanhood, Serbia, 2010 Percent distribution of children age 0–17 years according to living arrangements, percentage of children age 0–17 years in households not living with a biological parent and percentage of children who have one or both parents dead Living with both parents Living with neither parent Living with mother only Living with father only Impossible to determine Total Not living with a biological parent1 One or both parents dead2 Number of children age 0–17 years Only father alive Only mother alive Both are alive Both are dead Father alive Father dead Mother alive Mother dead Sex Male 89.1 .0 .1 .5 .1 6.0 .7 2.2 .4 .8 100.0 .7 1.3 2006 Female 88.0 .0 .0 1.6 .1 5.2 1.5 1.8 .2 1.6 100.0 1.7 1.8 2009 Region  Belgrade 89.7 .0 .2 .3 .0 6.8 .7 .9 .7 .6 100.0 .6 1.6 730 Vojvodina 86.3 .0 .0 1.3 .2 7.7 1.7 2.2 .0 .6 100.0 1.5 1.9 1077 Sumadija and Western Serbia 90.4 .0 .0 .8 .2 5.1 1.0 1.3 .2 1.0 100.0 1.0 1.4 1125 Southern and Eastern Serbia 88.2 .0 .0 1.5 .0 3.2 .9 3.2 .5 2.5 100.0 1.5 1.5 1083 Area  Urban 87.6 .0 .1 1.0 .1 7.3 1.0 1.6 .5 .9 100.0 1.1 1.7 2158 Rural 89.7 .0 .0 1.2 .1 3.7 1.2 2.4 .2 1.6 100.0 1.3 1.5 1857 Age  0–4 93.8 .0 .0 .5 .0 4.9 .3 .4 .0 .1 100.0 .5 .3 1335 5–9 89.3 .0 .0 .5 .0 5.6 .9 1.9 .5 1.3 100.0 .5 1.4 1059 10–14 85.6 .0 .0 .9 .2 7.0 2.2 2.5 .3 1.2 100.0 1.1 2.7 951 15–17 81.2 .0 .2 3.2 .4 4.9 1.5 4.4 .8 3.3 100.0 3.8 2.9 670 Wealth index quintiles  Poorest 83.8 .0 .0 2.3 .3 6.5 2.5 3.2 .0 1.4 100.0 2.6 2.8 747 Second 88.3 .0 .0 .5 .0 4.6 1.2 2.4 .4 2.6 100.0 .5 1.5 779 Middle 90.2 .0 .2 1.0 .2 4.3 1.0 2.2 .4 .6 100.0 1.4 1.8 805 Fourth 88.4 .0 .0 .5 .0 7.1 .6 1.4 .5 1.4 100.0 .5 1.1 826 Richest 91.5 .0 .0 1.1 .0 5.6 .5 .9 .3 .1 100.0 1.1 .8 859 Total 88.6 .0 .0 1.0 .1 5.6 1.1 2.0 .3 1.2 100.0 1.2 1.6 4015 1 MICS indicator 9.17 2 MICS indicator 9.18 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201038 Of the 4015 children age 0–17 recorded in MICS4, 89 Of the 4015 children age 0–17 recorded in MICS4, 89 percent live with both parents, 7 percent live with mothers percent live with both parents, 7 percent live with mothers only and 2 percent live with fathers only. About 1 percent only and 2 percent live with fathers only. About 1 percent live with neither of their biological parents while both live with neither of their biological parents while both of them are alive. Some 6 percent live with mothers only of them are alive. Some 6 percent live with mothers only while the biological father is alive.while the biological father is alive. Very few children lost one or both parents — 1 percent Very few children lost one or both parents — 1 percent of children have only their father dead and 0.3 percent of children have only their father dead and 0.3 percent of children have only their mother dead.of children have only their mother dead. Older children are less likely than younger children to live Older children are less likely than younger children to live with both parents and slightly more likely than younger with both parents and slightly more likely than younger children to have lost one or both parents. Table HH.6 also children to have lost one or both parents. Table HH.6 also shows that the percentage of children living with both shows that the percentage of children living with both parents is the highest in the richest wealth quintile (92 parents is the highest in the richest wealth quintile (92 percent) and lowest in the poorest quintile (84 percent). percent) and lowest in the poorest quintile (84 percent). MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 39 Sample CoverageSample Coverage Of the 1815 households selected for the sample, Of the 1815 households selected for the sample, 1782 were found to be occupied. Of these, 1711 were 1782 were found to be occupied. Of these, 1711 were successfully interviewed for a household response rate successfully interviewed for a household response rate of 96 percent. In the interviewed households, 2234 of 96 percent. In the interviewed households, 2234 women (aged between 15–49 years) were identified. women (aged between 15–49 years) were identified. Of these, 2118 were successfully interviewed, yielding Of these, 2118 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 95 percent within interviewed a response rate of 95 percent within interviewed households. In addition, 1618 children under the age households. In addition, 1618 children under the age of five were listed in the household questionnaire. of five were listed in the household questionnaire. Questionnaires were completed for 1604 of these Questionnaires were completed for 1604 of these children, which corresponds to a response rate of children, which corresponds to a response rate of 99 percent within interviewed households. In the 99 percent within interviewed households. In the interviewed households, 1121 men (aged between interviewed households, 1121 men (aged between 15–29 years) were identified. Of these, 877 were 15–29 years) were identified. Of these, 877 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 78 percent for men within interviewed households. 78 percent for men within interviewed households. Overall response rates of 91, 95 and 75 percent are Overall response rates of 91, 95 and 75 percent are calculated for the women’s, under-5’s and men’s calculated for the women’s, under-5’s and men’s interviews respectively (Table HH.1R).interviews respectively (Table HH.1R). IIIBIIIB ROMA SETTLEMENTS ROMA SETTLEMENTS SAMPLE COVERAGE AND SAMPLE COVERAGE AND THE CHARACTERISTICS THE CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND OF HOUSEHOLDS AND RESPONDENTSRESPONDENTS Table HH.1R: Results of household, women’s, men’s and under-5 interviews, Roma Settlements, 2010 Number of households, women, men, and children under 5 by results of the household, women’s, men’s and under-5’s interviews, and household, women’s, men’s and under-5’s response rates Area Total Urban Rural Households  Sampled 1142 673 1815 Occupied 1125 657 1782 Interviewed 1069 642 1711 Household response rate 95.0 97.7 96.0 Women Eligible 1428 806 2234 Interviewed 1369 749 2118 Women’s response rate 95.9 92.9 94.8 Women’s overall response rate 91.1 90.8 91.0 Men  Eligible 694 427 1121 Interviewed 540 337 877 Men’s response rate 77.8 78.9 78.2 Men’s overall response rate 73.9 77.1 75.1 Children under 5  Eligible 1032 586 1618 Mothers/caretakers interviewed 1024 580 1604 Under-5’s response rate 99.2 99.0 99.1 Under-5’s overall response rate 94.3 96.7 95.2 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 39 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201040 The response rates for households across residence The response rates for households across residence were as expected, with lower response rates of 95 were as expected, with lower response rates of 95 percent for urban areas. The response rate for men, percent for urban areas. The response rate for men, 78 percent, was much lower than for women and 78 percent, was much lower than for women and children. children. Characteristics of HouseholdsCharacteristics of Households The weighted age and sex distribution of the survey The weighted age and sex distribution of the survey population is provided in Table HH.2R. This distribution population is provided in Table HH.2R. This distribution is also used to produce the population pyramid in Figure is also used to produce the population pyramid in Figure HH.1R. In the 1711 households successfully interviewed HH.1R. In the 1711 households successfully interviewed in the survey, 8288 household members were listed. Of in the survey, 8288 household members were listed. Of these, 4165 were males, and 4123 were females. these, 4165 were males, and 4123 were females. Table HH.2R: Household age distribution by sex, Roma Settlements, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of the household population by five-year age groups, dependency age groups, and by child (age 0–17 years) and adult populations (age 18 or more), by sex   Males Females Total Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Age 0–4 611 14.7 583 14.1 1193 14.4 5–9 448 10.8 469 11.4 917 11.1 10–14 391 9.4 363 8.8 754 9.1 15–19 350 8.4 421 10.2 771 9.3 20–24 357 8.6 344 8.3 701 8.5 25–29 342 8.2 348 8.4 690 8.3 30–34 302 7.3 318 7.7 620 7.5 35–39 235 5.6 253 6.1 488 5.9 40–44 233 5.6 200 4.8 432 5.2 45–49 246 5.9 216 5.2 462 5.6 50–54 241 5.8 190 4.6 431 5.2 55–59 175 4.2 170 4.1 345 4.2 60–64 122 2.9 103 2.5 225 2.7 65–69 50 1.2 65 1.6 115 1.4 70–74 33 .8 45 1.1 78 .9 75–79 22 .5 15 .4 37 .4 80–84 6 .1 14 .3 20 .2 85+ 2 .0 6 .2 8 .1 Missing/DK 1 .0 0 .0 1 .0 Dependency age groups 0–14 1450 34.8 1415 34.3 2864 34.6 15–64 2602 62.5 2562 62.2 5164 62.3 65+ 112 2.7 146 3.5 258 3.1 Missing/DK 1 .0 0 .0 1 .0 Child and adult populations Children age 0–17 years 1636 39.3 1672 40.6 3309 39.9 Adults age 18+ years 2527 60.7 2450 59.4 4977 60.1 Missing/DK 1 .0 0 .0 1 .0 Total 4165 100.0 4123 100.0 8288 100.0 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201040 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 41 The age distribution for Roma settlements indicates that The age distribution for Roma settlements indicates that the proportion of children under the age of 5 is highest the proportion of children under the age of 5 is highest (about 14 percent), and then in each subsequent age-group (about 14 percent), and then in each subsequent age-group the proportion of the population decreases. Children the proportion of the population decreases. Children up to 17 years of age constitute about 40 percent of the up to 17 years of age constitute about 40 percent of the population, while only 3 percent belong to the group over population, while only 3 percent belong to the group over 65 years of age. There was almost no difference between 65 years of age. There was almost no difference between male and female distribution in the broad age groups.male and female distribution in the broad age groups. Tables HH.3R–HH.5R provide basic information Tables HH.3R–HH.5R provide basic information on the households, female respondents aged 15–49, on the households, female respondents aged 15–49, male male respondents aged 15–29, and children under-5 by respondents aged 15–29, and children under-5 by presenting the unweighted, as well as the weighted numbers. presenting the unweighted, as well as the weighted numbers. Information on the basic characteristics of households, Information on the basic characteristics of households, women, men and children under-5 interviewed in the survey women, men and children under-5 interviewed in the survey is essential for the interpretation of findings presented is essential for the interpretation of findings presented later in the report and can also provide an indication of the later in the report and can also provide an indication of the representativeness of the survey. The remaining tables in representativeness of the survey. The remaining tables in this report are presented only with weighted numbers. See this report are presented only with weighted numbers. See Appendix A for more details about the weighting.Appendix A for more details about the weighting. Weighted percent Number of households Weighted Unweighted Sex of household head  Male 86.4 1479 1476 Female 13.6 232 235 Area  Urban 70.1 1199 1069 Rural 29.9 512 642 Number of household members  1 4.6 79 54 2 9.7 165 100 3 14.3 245 195 4 17.9 306 290 5 17.0 290 318 6 16.0 273 332 7 11.6 198 212 8 4.1 69 92 9 2.1 35 52 10+ 3.0 51 66 Weighted percent Number of households Weighted Unweighted Education of household head  None 12.3 210 237 Primary 70.4 1204 1217 Secondary 16.4 280 240 Higher 1.0 17 17 Total 100.0 1711 1711 Households with at least  One child age 0–4 years 47.5 1711 1711 One child age 0–17 years 78.2 1711 1711 One woman age 15–49 years 81.7 1711 1711 One man age 15–29 years 50.0 1711 1711 Mean household size 4.8 1711 1711 Table HH.3R: Household composition, Roma Settlements, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of households by selected characteristics MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 41 Figure HH.1R: Age and sex distribution of household population, Roma settlements, 2010 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201042 Table HH.3R provides basic background information Table HH.3R provides basic background information on the households. Within households, the sex of the on the households. Within households, the sex of the household head, residence, number of household members household head, residence, number of household members and education of the household head, are shown in the and education of the household head, are shown in the table. These background characteristics are used in table. These background characteristics are used in subsequent tables in this report; the figures in the table subsequent tables in this report; the figures in the table are also intended to show the numbers of observations by are also intended to show the numbers of observations by major categories of analysis in the report.major categories of analysis in the report. The weighted and the unweighted numbers of households The weighted and the unweighted numbers of households are equal, since sample weights were normalized (See are equal, since sample weights were normalized (See Appendix A). The table also shows the proportion of Appendix A). The table also shows the proportion of households with at least one child under 18, at least one households with at least one child under 18, at least one child under 5, at least one eligible woman aged 15–49 and child under 5, at least one eligible woman aged 15–49 and at least one eligible man aged 15–29. The table also shows at least one eligible man aged 15–29. The table also shows the weighted average household size estimated by the the weighted average household size estimated by the survey.survey. Gender structure for the heads of households Gender structure for the heads of households indicates that 86 percent are men. About 70 percent indicates that 86 percent are men. About 70 percent of households are urban, while the rest are rural. of households are urban, while the rest are rural. The majority of households (about 77 percent) have The majority of households (about 77 percent) have three to seven members. In 82 percent of interviewed three to seven members. In 82 percent of interviewed households, there is at least one woman aged 15 to 49 households, there is at least one woman aged 15 to 49 and in 50 percent of interviewed households at least and in 50 percent of interviewed households at least one man aged 15–29 years. In 48 percent of interviewed one man aged 15–29 years. In 48 percent of interviewed households there is at least one child under 5 years of households there is at least one child under 5 years of age, and in 78 percent a child under 18. The survey age, and in 78 percent a child under 18. The survey estimated the average household size at 4.8 persons.estimated the average household size at 4.8 persons. Characteristics of FemaleCharacteristics of Female Respondents 15–49 Years of Age,Respondents 15–49 Years of Age, Male Respondents 15–29 YearsMale Respondents 15–29 Years of Age and Children Under-5of Age and Children Under-5 Tables HH.4R, HH.4R.M and HH.5R provide Tables HH.4R, HH.4R.M and HH.5R provide information on the background characteristics of information on the background characteristics of female respondents 15–49 years of age, men 15–29 female respondents 15–49 years of age, men 15–29 years of age, and of children under the age of 5. In years of age, and of children under the age of 5. In all the tables, the total numbers of weighted and all the tables, the total numbers of weighted and unweighted observations are equal, since sample unweighted observations are equal, since sample weights have been normalized (standardized). In weights have been normalized (standardized). In addition to providing useful information on the addition to providing useful information on the background characteristics of women, men and background characteristics of women, men and children, the tables are also intended to show the children, the tables are also intended to show the numbers of observations in each background category. numbers of observations in each background category. These categories are used in the subsequent tabulations These categories are used in the subsequent tabulations of this report.of this report. Table HH.4R: Women’s background characteristics, Roma Settlements, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of women age 15–49 years by selected background characteristics Weighted percent Number of women Weighted Unweighted Area  Urban 69.0 1461 1369 Rural 31.0 657 749 Age  15–19 20.2 429 373 20–24 16.7 354 439 25–29 17.1 363 407 30–34 15.1 320 294 35–39 11.8 251 234 40–44 9.1 193 193 45–49 9.8 208 178 Marital/Union status  Currently married/in union 76.6 1622 1690 Formerly married/in union 9.7 205 205 Never married/in union 13.7 291 223 Motherhood status  Ever gave birth 80.8 1711 1798 Never gave birth 19.2 407 320 Births in last two years  Yes 20.8 440 550 No 79.2 1678 1568 Education  None 17.1 363 398 Primary 67.8 1437 1454 Secondary 13.9 295 251 Higher 1.1 24 15 Wealth index quintile  Poorest 18.7 396 487 Second 19.1 404 429 Middle 19.1 404 396 Fourth 22.1 468 418 Richest 21.1 447 388 Total 100.0 2118 2118 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201042 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 43 Table HH.4R provides background characteristics of Table HH.4R provides background characteristics of female respondents aged between 15–49 years. The female respondents aged between 15–49 years. The table includes information on the distribution of women table includes information on the distribution of women according to residence, age, marital status, motherhood according to residence, age, marital status, motherhood status, births in the two years preceding the survey, status, births in the two years preceding the survey, educationeducation6 and wealth index quintiles. and wealth index quintiles. Approximately, 69 percent of interviewed eligible women Approximately, 69 percent of interviewed eligible women live in urban areas. The age distribution of women between live in urban areas. The age distribution of women between 25–49 is similar to the distribution of the overall population. 25–49 is similar to the distribution of the overall population. Almost 77 percent of all women in this sample are married, Almost 77 percent of all women in this sample are married, 6 Unless otherwise stated, throughout this report “education” refers to the educational level attained by the respondent when it is used as a background variable. 7 A principal components analysis was performed by using information on the ownership of consumer goods, dwelling characteristics, water and sanitation, and other characteristics that are related to the household’s wealth to assign weights (factor scores) to each of the household assets. Each household was then assigned a wealth score based on these weights and the assets owned by that household. The survey household population was then ranked according to the wealth score of the household they are living in, and was finally divided into 5 equal parts (quintiles) from lowest (poorest) to highest (richest). The assets used in these calculations were as follows: type of water and sanitation, number of rooms for sleeping per member; main material of dwelling floor, roof and exterior walls; the type of fuel used for cooking; presence in household of electricity, radio, television, non-mobile telephone, refrigerator, electric stove, bed, table with chairs, vacuum cleaner, PC/Laptop, closet, washing machine, drying machine, air conditioner, jacuzzi tub and video monitoring system; possession by household members of watch, mobile telephone, bicycle, motorcycle or scooter, animal-drawn cart, car or truck, boat with motor, tractor; and ownership of bank accounts by members of the household. The wealth index is assumed to capture the underlying long-term wealth through information on the household assets, and is intended to produce a ranking of households by wealth, from poorest to richest. The wealth index does not provide information on absolute poverty, current income or expenditure levels. The wealth scores calculated are applicable for only the particular data set they are based on. Further information on the construction of the wealth index can be found in Filmer, D. and Pritchett, L., 2001. “Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data — or tears: An application to educational enrolments in states of India”. Demography 38(1): 115–132. Gwatkin, D. R., Rutstein, S., Johnson, K., Pande, R. and Wagstaff. A., 2000. Socio-Economic Differences in Health, Nutrition, and Population. HNP/Poverty Thematic Group, Washington, DC: World Bank. Rutstein, S. O. and Johnson, K., 2004. The DHS Wealth Index. DHS Comparative Reports No. 6. Calverton, Maryland: ORC Macro. while 14 percent have never been married. Distribution while 14 percent have never been married. Distribution by motherhood is similar to marital status: 81 percent of by motherhood is similar to marital status: 81 percent of women have given birth. The majority of interviewed women women have given birth. The majority of interviewed women have primary education (68 percent), while the proportion of have primary education (68 percent), while the proportion of women with no education is 17 percent. Overall, 14 percent women with no education is 17 percent. Overall, 14 percent of women between 15–49 have secondary education, and of women between 15–49 have secondary education, and only 1 percent have higher education. As far as wealth index only 1 percent have higher education. As far as wealth index quintiles are concerned, less women live in households quintiles are concerned, less women live in households within the poorest (19 percent) and second quintile (19 within the poorest (19 percent) and second quintile (19 percent), while the majority of women live in households percent), while the majority of women live in households within the richest quintile (about 21 percent of women).within the richest quintile (about 21 percent of women). Weighted percent Number of men Weighted Unweighted Area  Urban 68.2 598 540 Rural 31.8 279 337 Age  15–19 33.7 295 247 20–24 33.4 293 302 25–29 32.9 289 328 Marital/Union status  Currently married/in union 54.6 478 572 Formerly married/in union 6.5 57 41 Never married/in union 39.0 342 264 Weighted percent Number of men Weighted Unweighted Education  None 7.6 66 83 Primary 68.3 599 631 Secondary 23.1 202 153 Higher 1.0 9 10 Wealth index quintile  Poorest 21.8 191 218 Second 18.9 166 180 Middle 19.6 172 164 Fourth 21.1 185 179 Richest 18.6 163 136 Total 100.0 877 877 Table HH.4R.M provides background characteristics of Table HH.4R.M provides background characteristics of male respondents between 15–29 years of age. The table male respondents between 15–29 years of age. The table includes information on the distribution of men according includes information on the distribution of men according Table HH.4R.M: Men’s background characteristics, Roma Settlements, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of men age 15–29 years by selected background characteristics to residence, age, marital status, education and wealth to residence, age, marital status, education and wealth index quintilesindex quintiles7. . MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 43 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201044 Approximately, 68 percent of interviewed eligible men live Approximately, 68 percent of interviewed eligible men live in urban areas, with almost equal distribution in three age in urban areas, with almost equal distribution in three age groups (around 33 percent). Almost 55 percent of all men groups (around 33 percent). Almost 55 percent of all men in this sample are currently married, while 39 percent have in this sample are currently married, while 39 percent have never been married. The majority of interviewed men have never been married. The majority of interviewed men have primary education (68 percent), while the proportion of primary education (68 percent), while the proportion of men with no education is 8 percent, secondary education men with no education is 8 percent, secondary education 23 percent, and those with higher education only 1 23 percent, and those with higher education only 1 percent. The distribution of men between 15–29 years of percent. The distribution of men between 15–29 years of age within the wealth index quintiles is rather uniform age within the wealth index quintiles is rather uniform (19 to 22 percent).(19 to 22 percent). Some background characteristics of children under 5 are Some background characteristics of children under 5 are presented in Table HH.5R. These include the distribution presented in Table HH.5R. These include the distribution of children by several attributes: sex, residence, age, of children by several attributes: sex, residence, age, mother’s or caretaker’s education, wealth index. mother’s or caretaker’s education, wealth index. The proportion of male children in the under-5 The proportion of male children in the under-5 sample for Roma settlements is around 51 percent. Age sample for Roma settlements is around 51 percent. Age distribution shows that about 16 percent of children distribution shows that about 16 percent of children are under one year of age, while the remaining one-year are under one year of age, while the remaining one-year categories range between 19 to 23 percent. Majority categories range between 19 to 23 percent. Majority of children under 5 (69 percent) have a mother with of children under 5 (69 percent) have a mother with primary education. As for the wealth index quintiles, primary education. As for the wealth index quintiles, more Roma children under 5 live in households within more Roma children under 5 live in households within the poorest quintile (25 percent) than in the richest the poorest quintile (25 percent) than in the richest quintile (17 percent). quintile (17 percent). Table HH.5R: Under-5’s background characteristics, Roma Settlements, 2010 Percent and frequency distribution of children under five years of age by selected characteristics Weighted percent Number of under-5 children Weighted Unweighted Sex  Male 51.3 823 839 Female 48.7 781 765 Area  Urban 67.6 1084 1024 Rural 32.4 520 580 Age  0–5 months 8.4 134 123 6–11 months 7.5 121 125 12–23 months 21.0 337 335 24–35 months 22.5 360 336 36–47 months 19.0 305 288 48–59 months 21.6 347 397 Mother’s education*  None 19.9 319 358 Primary 69.2 1111 1090 Secondary 10.4 166 151 Higher .5 8 5 Wealth index quintile  Poorest 24.7 396 489 Second 23.7 380 356 Middle 17.9 288 262 Fourth 17.2 276 267 Richest 16.5 264 230 Total 100.0 1604 1604 * Mother’s education refers to educational attainment of mothers and caretakers of children under 5. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201044 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 45 ChildrenChildren’s Living Arrangementss Living Arrangements in Roma Settlementsin Roma Settlements Table HH.6R presents information on the living arrangementsTable HH.6R presents information on the living arrangements and orphanhood status of children under age 18 living in and orphanhood status of children under age 18 living in Roma settlements.Roma settlements. Table HH.6R: Children’s living arrangements and orphanhood, Roma Settlements, 2010 Percent distribution of children age 0–17 years according to living arrangements, percentage of children age 0–17 years in households not living with a biological parent and percentage of children who have one or both parents dead Living with both parents Living with neither parent Living with mother only Living with father only Impossible to determine Total Not living with a biological parent1 One or both parents dead2 Number of children age 0–17 years Only father alive Only mother alive Both are alive Both are dead Father alive Father dead Mother alive Mother dead Sex Male 83.4 .3 .2 1.3 .2 7.9 1.1 3.2 .6 1.7 100.0 2.0 2.7 1636 Female 80.2 .1 .3 6.2 .0 6.2 1.2 3.1 .3 2.4 100.0 6.6 2.0 1672 Area  Urban 82.7 .0 .4 3.3 .1 6.9 .9 2.7 .5 2.5 100.0 3.8 2.3 2238 Rural 79.8 .6 .0 4.9 .1 7.4 1.6 4.1 .4 1.2 100.0 5.5 2.6 1071 Age  0–4 87.3 .0 .0 .4 .0 8.8 .8 2.5 .1 .1 100.0 .4 .9 1193 5–9 81.9 .2 .1 2.1 .0 7.1 1.7 3.9 .5 2.6 100.0 2.4 2.4 917 10–14 82.9 .6 .1 3.6 .1 6.2 .8 2.3 .9 2.6 100.0 4.4 3.5 754 15–17 65.0 .1 1.7 16.7 .5 3.6 1.5 5.1 .5 5.4 100.0 19.0 4.3 444 Wealth index quintiles  Poorest 78.8 .0 .0 3.0 .0 9.9 1.9 4.3 .2 1.9 100.0 3.0 2.1 798 Second 83.4 .7 1.0 2.4 .0 6.4 1.9 2.5 1.1 .7 100.0 4.1 4.8 725 Middle 81.3 .1 .0 4.0 .5 6.0 .1 3.3 .2 4.4 100.0 4.7 1.0 622 Fourth 80.9 .0 .2 5.2 .0 8.2 .0 3.5 .2 1.9 100.0 5.4 1.8 590 Richest 85.4 .0 .0 5.0 .0 3.9 1.3 2.1 .6 1.7 100.0 5.0 1.9 575 Total 81.8 .2 .3 3.8 .1 7.0 1.1 3.2 .4 2.1 100.0 4.3 2.4 3309 1 MICS indicator 9.17 2 MICS indicator 9.18 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 45 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201046 Of the 3309 children age 0–17 recorded in MICS4, 82 Of the 3309 children age 0–17 recorded in MICS4, 82 percent live with both parents, 8 percent live with mothers percent live with both parents, 8 percent live with mothers only and 4 percent live with fathers only. About 4 percent only and 4 percent live with fathers only. About 4 percent live with neither of their biological parents while both of live with neither of their biological parents while both of them are alive. In total, 7 percent live with mothers only them are alive. In total, 7 percent live with mothers only while the biological father is alive. while the biological father is alive. Very few children lost one or both parents — 1 percent Very few children lost one or both parents — 1 percent of children have only their father dead and 0.4 percent of of children have only their father dead and 0.4 percent of children have only their mother dead.children have only their mother dead. Older children are less likely than younger children to live Older children are less likely than younger children to live with both parents and slightly more likely than younger with both parents and slightly more likely than younger children to have lost one or both parents. Table HH.6R children to have lost one or both parents. Table HH.6R also shows that the percentage of children living with both also shows that the percentage of children living with both parents is the highest in the richest wealth quintile (85 parents is the highest in the richest wealth quintile (85 percent) and lowest in the poorest quintile (77 percent). percent) and lowest in the poorest quintile (77 percent). Some 11 percent of children in the poorest households Some 11 percent of children in the poorest households live with their mother only while their father is alive. The live with their mother only while their father is alive. The corresponding proportion of such children in the richest corresponding proportion of such children in the richest quintile is 4 percent.quintile is 4 percent. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201046 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 47 One of the overarching Millennium Development Goals One of the overarching Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is the reduction of infant and under-five mortality. (MDGs) is the reduction of infant and under-five mortality. Specifically, the MDGs call for a reduction in under-five Specifically, the MDGs call for a reduction in under-five mortality by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015. Monitoring mortality by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015. Monitoring progress towards this goal is an important but difficult progress towards this goal is an important but difficult objective. Measuring childhood mortality may seem easy, objective. Measuring childhood mortality may seem easy, but attempts that use direct questions, such as “Has anyone but attempts that use direct questions, such as “Has anyone in this household died in the last year?” usually yield in this household died in the last year?” usually yield inaccurate results. Directly measuring child mortality from inaccurate results. Directly measuring child mortality from birth histories is time consuming, expensive, and requires birth histories is time consuming, expensive, and requires greater attention to training and supervision. Alternatively, greater attention to training and supervision. Alternatively, indirect methods developed to measure child mortality indirect methods developed to measure child mortality can produce robust estimates that are comparable with can produce robust estimates that are comparable with the ones obtained from other sources. Indirect methods the ones obtained from other sources. Indirect methods also minimize the pitfalls of memory lapses, inexact or also minimize the pitfalls of memory lapses, inexact or misinterpreted definitions, and poor interviewing technique. misinterpreted definitions, and poor interviewing technique. IVIV CHILD MORTALITY CHILD MORTALITY 8 United Nations. 1983. Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic Estimation (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.83.XIII.2); United Nations. 1990a. QFIVE — United Nations Program for Child Mortality Estimation; United Nations. 1990b. Step-by-step Guide to the Estimation of Child Mortality. The infant mortality rate is the probability of dying before the The infant mortality rate is the probability of dying before the first birthday. The under-five mortality rate is the probability first birthday. The under-five mortality rate is the probability of dying before the fifth birthday. In MICS surveys, infant of dying before the fifth birthday. In MICS surveys, infant and under five mortality rates are usually calculated based and under five mortality rates are usually calculated based on an indirect estimation technique known as the Brass on an indirect estimation technique known as the Brass methodmethod8. The data used in the estimation are: the mean . The data used in the estimation are: the mean number of total children born for five year-age groups of number of total children born for five year-age groups of women from age 15 to 49, and the proportion of these children women from age 15 to 49, and the proportion of these children who are dead, also for five-year age groups of women (Table who are dead, also for five-year age groups of women (Table CM.1R). The technique converts the proportion of dead CM.1R). The technique converts the proportion of dead children among women in each age group into probabilities children among women in each age group into probabilities of dying by taking into account the approximate length of of dying by taking into account the approximate length of exposure of children to the risk of dying, assuming a particular exposure of children to the risk of dying, assuming a particular model age pattern of mortality. Based on previous information model age pattern of mortality. Based on previous information on mortality in Roma settlements in Serbia, the East modelon mortality in Roma settlements in Serbia, the East model life table was selected as most appropriate. life table was selected as most appropriate. Table CM.1R: Children ever born, children surviving and proportion dead, Roma Settlements, 2010 Mean and total numbers of children ever born, children surviving and proportion dead by age of women Children ever born Children surviving Proportion dead Number of women Mean Total Mean Total Age  15–19 .432 185 .426 183 .012 429 20–24 1.587 561 1.575 557 .008 354 25–29 2.378 863 2.349 853 .012 363 30–34 2.766 886 2.716 870 .018 320 35–39 3.036 761 2.969 744 .022 251 40–44 3.104 600 2.986 577 .038 193 45–49 2.774 578 2.583 538 .069 208 Total 2.094 4434 2.040 4322 .025 2118 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 47 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201048 The module on child mortality was used only for Roma The module on child mortality was used only for Roma settlements because there are no data in the regular settlements because there are no data in the regular statistics and it is estimated that values are higher than statistics and it is estimated that values are higher than the national average. Secondly, it was estimated that the the national average. Secondly, it was estimated that the regular statistics provided accurate data for the general regular statistics provided accurate data for the general population, and also that mortality is low, so with this population, and also that mortality is low, so with this research technique we could not compile reliable data.research technique we could not compile reliable data. Table CM.2R provides estimates of child mortality. The Table CM.2R provides estimates of child mortality. The infant mortality rate is estimated at 14 per thousand live infant mortality rate is estimated at 14 per thousand live births, while births, while the probability of dying under age 5 (U5MR) the probability of dying under age 5 (U5MR) is around 15 per thousand live births. These estimates is around 15 per thousand live births. These estimates have been calculated by averaging mortality estimates have been calculated by averaging mortality estimates obtained from women aged 25–29 and 30–34, and refer to obtained from women aged 25–29 and 30–34, and refer to mid-2003. There is a difference between the probabilities mid-2003. There is a difference between the probabilities of dying between males and females. The infant mortality of dying between males and females. The infant mortality rate among boys is 18 and among girls 9, and the under-rate among boys is 18 and among girls 9, and the under- five mortality rate among boys is 19, compared to 10 five mortality rate among boys is 19, compared to 10 per thousand live births among per thousand live births among girls. The highest infant girls. The highest infant mortality rates (26 per thousand live births) mortality rates (26 per thousand live births) and under-and under- five mortality rates (29 per thousand live births) are five mortality rates (29 per thousand live births) are among Roma children whose mothers had no education. among Roma children whose mothers had no education. It is important to mention that mothers of almost 20 It is important to mention that mothers of almost 20 percent of Roma children had no education (Table HH.5R). percent of Roma children had no education (Table HH.5R). Differentials in under-five mortality rates by selected Differentials in under-five mortality rates by selected background characteristics are shown in Figure CM.1R.background characteristics are shown in Figure CM.1R. Table CM.2R: Child mortality, Roma Settlements, 2010 Infant and under-five mortality rates, Model — East   Infant mortality rate1 Under-fivemortality rate2 Sex  Male 18 19 Female 9 10 Area  Urban 14 15 Rural 12 13 Mother’s education  None 26 29 Attended school 11 12 Total 14 15 1 MICS indicator 1.2; MDG indicator 4.2 2 MICS indicator 1.1; MDG indicator 4.1 MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201048 Figure CM.1R: Under-5 mortality rates by background characteristics, Roma settlements, 2010 MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 49 Nutritional StatusNutritional Status Children’s nutritional status is a reflection of their overall Children’s nutritional status is a reflection of their overall health. When children have access to an adequate food health. When children have access to an adequate food supply, are not exposed to repeated illness, and are well supply, are not exposed to repeated illness, and are well cared for, they reach their growth potential and are cared for, they reach their growth potential and are considered well nourished.considered well nourished. Malnutrition is associated with more than half of all Malnutrition is associated with more than half of all child deaths worldwide. Undernourished children are child deaths worldwide. Undernourished children are more likely to die from common childhood ailments, and more likely to die from common childhood ailments, and those who survive, tend to have recurring sicknesses and those who survive, tend to have recurring sicknesses and faltering growth. Three-quarters of the children who die faltering growth. Three-quarters of the children who die from malnutrition-related causes were only mildly or from malnutrition-related causes were only mildly or moderately malnourished, showing no outward sign of moderately malnourished, showing no outward sign of their vulnerability. The Millennium Development target their vulnerability. The Millennium Development target is to reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer is to reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger between 1990 and 2015. A reduction in the from hunger between 1990 and 2015. A reduction in the prevalence of malnutrition will also assist in the goal to prevalence of malnutrition will also assist in the goal to reduce child mortality.reduce child mortality. In a well-nourished population, there is a reference In a well-nourished population, there is a reference distribution of height and weight for children under the age distribution of height and weight for children under the age of five. Under-nourishment in a population can be gauged by of five. Under-nourishment in a population can be gauged by comparing children to a reference population. The reference comparing children to a reference population. The reference population used in this report is based on newpopulation used in this report is based on new9 WHO WHO growth standardsgrowth standards1010. Each of the three nutritional status . Each of the three nutritional status indicators can be expressed in standard deviation units indicators can be expressed in standard deviation units (z-scores) from the median of the reference population. (z-scores) from the median of the reference population. Weight-for-age is a measure of both acute and chronic Weight-for-age is a measure of both acute and chronic malnutrition. Children whose weight-for-age is more malnutrition. Children whose weight-for-age is more V NUTRITION NUTRITION 9 The reference population used in MICS3 report was WHO/CDC/NCHS reference that was recommended by UNICEF and WHO at the time the MICS3 survey was implemented. 10 http://www.who.int/childgrowth/standards/second_set/technical_report_2.pdf than two standard deviations below the median of the than two standard deviations below the median of the reference population are considered reference population are considered moderately or severely moderately or severely underweight underweight while those whose weight-for-age is more while those whose weight-for-age is more than three standard deviations below the median are than three standard deviations below the median are classified as classified as severely underweightseverely underweight. Height-for-age is a measure of linear growth. Children Height-for-age is a measure of linear growth. Children whose height-for-age is more than two standard whose height-for-age is more than two standard deviations below the median of the reference population deviations below the median of the reference population are considered short for their age and are classified as are considered short for their age and are classified as moderately or severely stuntedmoderately or severely stunted. Those whose height-for-age . Those whose height-for-age is more than three standard deviations below the median is more than three standard deviations below the median are classified as are classified as severely stuntedseverely stunted. Stunting is a reflection . Stunting is a reflection of chronic malnutrition as a result of failure to receive of chronic malnutrition as a result of failure to receive adequate nutrition over a long period, and recurrent adequate nutrition over a long period, and recurrent or or chronic illness. chronic illness. Finally, children whose weight-for-height is more Finally, children whose weight-for-height is more than two standard deviations below the median of the than two standard deviations below the median of the reference population are classified as reference population are classified as moderately or moderately or severely wastedseverely wasted, while those who fall more than three , while those who fall more than three standard deviations below the median are classified standard deviations below the median are classified as as severely wastedseverely wasted. Wasting is usually the result of a . Wasting is usually the result of a recent nutritional deficiency. recent nutritional deficiency. In MICS, weights and heights of all children under In MICS, weights and heights of all children under 5 years of age were measured using anthropometric 5 years of age were measured using anthropometric equipment recommended by UNICEF (www.childinfo.org). equipment recommended by UNICEF (www.childinfo.org). Findings in this section are based on the results of Findings in this section are based on the results of these measurements.these measurements. MULTIPLE INDICATOR CLUSTER SURVEY 201050 Table NU.1 shows the percentages of children classified Table NU.1 shows the percentages of children classified into each of these categories, based on anthropometric into each of these categories, based on anthropometric measurements taken during fieldwork. Additionally, measurements taken during fieldwork. Additionally, the table includes the percentage of children who are the table includes the percentage of children who are Table NU.1: Nutritional status of children, Serbia, 2010 Percentage of children under age 5 by nutritional status according to three anthropometric indices: weight for age, height for age, and weight for height   Weight for age Number of children under age 5 Height for age Number of children under age 5 Weight for height Number of children under age 5 Underweight Mean Z-Score (SD) Stunted Mean Z-Score (SD) Wasted Overweight Mean Z-Score (SD) percent below percent below percent below percent above –2 SD1 –3 SD2 –2 SD3 –3 SD4 –2 SD5 –3 SD6 + 2 SD Sex  Male 1.5 .5 .7 1472 5.9 2.7 .4 1337 2.7 .7 16.6 .7 1308 Female 1.7 .5 .6 1532 7.2 3.7 .2 1408 4.2 .8 14.7 .6 1391 Region  Belgrade 4.8 2.2 .6 583 8.3 4.3 .4 565 4.9 1.1 12.4 .5 547 Vojvodina .6 .1 .6 933 5.1 1.9 .3 879 3.7 .5 12.5 .6 864 Sumadija and Western Serbia 1.0 .1 .8 694 5.6 3.0 .4 639 1.5 .5 19.9 .8 632 Southern and Eastern Serbia .9 .1 .7 794 8.1 4.2 .2 661 4.1 1.1 18.3 .8 656 Area  Urban 1.8 .4 .7 1657 5.5 1.8 .4 1531 3.8 .9 13.5 .6 1501 Rural 1.3 .7 .6 1348 7.9 5.0 .2 1214 3.1 .6 18.2 .7 1198 Age  0–5 months 7.7 2.9 –.3 239 8.0 6.5 .1 226 13.0 3.3 7.6 –.3 219 6–11 months 1.4 .7 .6 270 10.4 6.3 .2 237 2.7 1.7 18.4 .8 237 12–23 months .8 .3 1.0 575 9.5 4.9 .3 504 3.6 .2 24.1 1.1 502 24–35 months 2.6 .7 .7 674 6.5 2.5 .3 606 2.9 .5 15.0 .7 597 36–47 months .2 .0 .8 574 5.3 2.0 .5 534 2.8 .5 15.8 .8 528 48–59 months .3 .1 .6 672 3.5 1.2 .4 638 1.6 .5 10.9 .5 616 Mother’s education  Primary 1.7 .5 .4 423 7.6 4.0 –.1 386 2.8 1.5 16.3 .6 381 Secondary 2.1 .8 .7 1754 7.6 3.9 .3 1600 3.8 .4 17.7 .7 1565 Higher .4 .0 .8 796 3.5 .9 .5 729 3.4 1.2 10.8 .5 723 Wealth index quintile  Poorest 3.0 1.8 .4 530 9.3 6.1 –.1 488 5.2 1.3 15.5 .6 486 Second 2.1 .9 .5 566 9.1 4.5 .1 528 1.2 .3 16.8 .7 516 Middle .6 .2 .7 552 6.3 3.3 .4 496 2.9 .4 16.8 .7 485 Fourth .1 .0 .8 603 6.0 2.0 .5 544 3.2 .5 17.9 .7 527 Richest 2.1 .0 .8 753 3.4 .9 .5 690 4.7 1.2 12.1 .6 684 Total 1.6 .5 .7 3004 6.6 3.2 .3 2745 3.5 .8 15.6 .7 2699 1 MICS indicator 2.1a and MDG indicator 1.8 2 MICS indicator 2.1b 3 MICS indicator 2.2a, 4 MICS indicator 2.2b 5 MICS indicator 2.3a, 6 MICS indicator 2.3b overweight, which takes into account those children whose overweight, which takes into account those children whose weight for height is above 2 standard deviations from the weight for height is above 2 standard deviations from the median of the reference population, and mean z-scores for median of the reference population, and mean z-scores for all three anthropometric indicators.all three anthropometric indicators. MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 51 Children whose measurements are outside a plausible Children whose measurements are outside a plausible range are excluded from Table NU.1. Children are range are excluded from Table NU.1. Children are excluded from one or more of the anthropometric excluded from one or more of the anthropometric indicators when their weight or height (whichever indicators when their weight or height (whichever is applicable) has not been measured. For example is applicable) has not been measured. For example if a child has been weighed but his/her height has not if a child has been weighed but his/her height has not been measured, the child is included in underweight been measured, the child is included in underweight calculations, but not in the calculations for stunting and calculations, but not in the calculations for stunting and wasting. Percentages of children by age and reasons for wasting. Percentages of children by age and reasons for exclusion are shown in the data quality Tables DQ.8 exclusion are shown in the data quality Tables DQ.8 and DQ.9. Overall, 79 percent of children had both their and DQ.9. Overall, 79 percent of children had both their weight and height measured (Table DQ.9). Table DQ.9 weight and height measured (Table DQ.9)

View the publication

You are currently offline. Some pages or content may fail to load.