* Village-Level
*Migrant Follow-Up
*Person Identifier
You are here: Home > Data > Identifiers > Village-Level

The Village-Level Identifiers

Restricted-Use Data

Prior to each round of data collection, a unique number was assigned to villages that existed within the 1984 Nang Rong district boundary.  In each of the survey years, this unique number became the village identifier variable.  Below are the variable names for the village identifiers: 

1984 Survey
1994 Survey
2000 Survey

As shown in the table, all village identifier variable names have a "VILL" prefix, which is followed by the last two digits of the survey year.  The village identifier variables are in alphanumeric format (with leading zeroes), but the lengths are different across the survey years.   In 1984, the village identifier is a 2-digit number.   In 1994, the length of the identifier increased to 4-digits.  And then, in 2000, the length increased again to 6-digits.  The 6-digit variable can be broken down into district, subdistrict and moo ti (or village number).

Public-Use Data

Due to reasons of confidentiality, the village identifier variables are not available in the public-use data

Village-Level Concepts/Issues...

The 1984 Nang Rong District Boundary

The number of districts in the Buriram province have increased over time, mainly for administrative purposes.  The increase in districts usually happens by one district splitting into 2 or more districts.  This, of course, affects the district boundaries.  Please examine the maps below to see how the original 1984 Nang Rong district boundary and shape changed from one district in 1984 (Nang Rong) to four districts in 2000 (Nang Rong, Chamni, Non Suwan and Chalermprakiet):

District Name:
Nang Rong
Chamni Non Suwan Chalermprakiet

1984 Survey 1994 Survey 2000 Survey

Despite these changes in district boundaries, villages within the original 1984 Nang Rong district boundary were assigned a unique village number during the three rounds of data collection.  Please note that in the 1984 survey this only included a sample of all the villages within the district boundary, while in the 1994 and 2000 surveys all villages within the original 1984 Nang Rong district boundary were assigned a unique village number.  

The Split Villages

In the same manner as the districts, the number of villages and their boundaries changed over time as well.  As the villages grew, they would sometimes split into smaller villages, again mainly for administrative purposes.  There have been several villages within the study area that have split into 2 or more villages since the first round of data collection in 1984.   The diagram below shows just a couple of ways a village may have split over time:

Village A split into A and A1 between 1984 and 1994.  Village B split twice between 1994 and 2000 creating two more villages B1 and B2.   Due to the splits, the number of study villages that were administered the household survey increased from the original 51 in 1984 to 76 in 1994 and then 92 in 2000.   The number of villages that were administered the community survey went from the original 51 in 1984 to 310 in 1994 and then 346 in 2000.   Please note again that the 1984 community survey was administered to only a sample of all the villages within the old Nang Rong district boundary, while the 1994 and 2000 community surveys included all villlages.

"This Village"

The use of the phrase "this village" applies to the 1994 and 2000 household data and is related to the split villages concept.  For some questions in the household questionnaires, "this village" refers to the 1984 boundary of the study village.  For example, if a 1984 study village had split into 3 villages by 2000, like Village B in the split village diagram above, the questions in the 2000 household questionnaire would be referring to the three villages - B, B1 and B2 - as a single entity.  Please note, however, that each of the three villages would still be administered their own 2000 community questionnaire.

Invalid Village Sets

Given that the three village identifier variables - vill84, vill94 and vill00 - are not coded in the same manner, the Nang Rong Projects has a master village data set (or a translation table) which shows how the villages link back and forth across time from 1984 to 1994 to 2000.  For instance, if vill94="2022", then according to the master village data set, the 1984 and 2000 village identifiers should be:  vill84="22" and vill00="020809," respectively.   This would be a valid set of village identifiers.  In the 1994 and 2000 surveys, 99% of the households have a valid set of village identifiers; however, there is a small group of households in each survey that do not have a valid set.   In the 1994 survey, there are 9 such households (flagged as v8494fl=1), while in the 2000 survey there are 27 households (flagged as v9400fl=1).  Here are four households from the 1994 and 2000 surveys that have invalid village sets:




The first 1994 household originated in village 11 in 1984 and should have linked to village 2011 in 1994; however it linked to village 2012.   In the same way, the second 1994 household should have linked to village 2022 in 1994, but instead it linked to village 2021.   In 2000, the first household came from village 2042 in 1994 and should have linked to 020308 in 2000, but instead linked to 020309.  In similar fashion, the second 2000 household that originated in 2045 should have linked to village 021405 and not 021409.  Given the invalid village links, it certainly appeared that the households moved from one village to another between the data collection years.  However, on close inspection, it was discovered that these households were most likely part of smaller "sub-villages" that were located near two "main" villages.   In one survey year, one of the main villages included the sub-village households on its village roster, and then in the following survey year the second main village included the same sub-village on its village roster.   So, the household did not move, but the boundaries around them changed.  

In general, the invalid village sets are not a problem in working with the data.   However, the one exception is when analysis or variable construction, using the 1994 or 2000 data, calls for grouping individuals or households into the original 51 villages from 1984.   Due to this small number of households with invalid village sets, the analyst should not use the VILL84 variable for grouping the individuals or households, but instead should use a variable called V84.   The V84 variable is in the individual-level data sets in 1994 and 2000.  It is basically the 1984 village number of the individual that corresponds to the village in which they are currently residing, and not the 1984 village number that they necessarily link back to. 

  Last Modified: 03/22/2005 UNC Carolina Population Center