METHODOLOGICAL
SYNTHESISThe third Survey on Employment and the Informal Sector (EESI3) is a two-phase statistical survey, the first of which aims to understand employment (Employment Survey) and the second to assess the economic activities of the non-agricultural informal sector (Informal Sector Survey). The first EESI-type survey was carried out in 2005 and the second in 2010. The geographical scope of this operation is the entire national territory. For the technical needs of the survey, the national territory was divided into 12 survey regions: the cities of Douala and Yaoundé, Adamawa, the Centre without Yaoundé, the East, the Far North, the Littoral without Douala, the North, the Northwest, the West, the South and the South-West. The sampling design is stratified at two stages. Stratification was carried out by combining the 12 survey strata with the residence strata (urban, semi-urban, rural). A total of 32 strata were defined. In the first degree, the 882 ZDs were drawn to be retained in the sample. At the second level, 10,788 households were drawn in all the selected ZDs. The Employment Survey (Phase 1) successfully surveyed 8,738 households out of the 10,788 drawn. In these households, the survey looked at the employment status of all persons aged 10 years or older. However, the indicators are calculated on the basis of the legal age group for entry into the labour market in Cameroon (14 years), except for the indicators on child labour which are calculated on the basis of 10-17 year olds. Phase 1 identified 4,762 non-agricultural informal production units (IPUs), of which 4,576 were surveyed in the Informal Sector Survey (Phase 2). The results for this phase will be available in the relevant publications. As in the previous edition, the two phases of the survey took place at the same time. The EESI3 methodology was developed so that the information collected would be used to produce the indicators according to the new conceptual framework resulting from the 19th ICLS in 2013 and the old conceptual framework. However, the results obtained by the new approach cannot be comparable to those obtained by the old approach given the methodological changes. The reader is advised not to make these comparisons.
