Click here to load reader

Censuses 2011 and 2021: What surprises are emerging and how they show that cancellation is stupid Danny Dorling University of Sheffield UK RadStats annual

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Censuses 2011 and 2021: What surprises are emerging and how they show that cancellation is stupid...

  • Slide 1

Censuses 2011 and 2021: What surprises are emerging and how they show that cancellation is stupid Danny Dorling University of Sheffield UK RadStats annual conference York February 23 rd 2013 (for those who are bored They can play Wheres Wally using this image) Slide 2 Is it true? People are sceptical of those in power and what they say However, the census is not conducted by people at the heart of power, but by a group who have been told that their services (in this regard) are not needed next time. I doubt that had any effect, but how sure can we be of the new one number? Slide 3 There are now many numbers. The first number is for England and Wales. It has received most attention, an extra 1%: 2011: 56.1 million, 53.0 million in England and 3.1 million in Wales. Half a million more than thought to be here. 3.7 million more than in 2001, 5.3 million more than in 1991. Accelerating growth? Led by Tower Hamlets, Newham and Manchester and by the 18 to 29 age group But with the second lowest growth in households in a century (to 23.4m the lowest growth in households was 1991 to 2001, as economic inequalities continued rising) Slide 4 ONS (2012) 2011 Census - Population and Household Estimates for England and Wales, March 2011, 16 July, corrected version 20 July Note that for unclear reasons: Comparison with 2001 and 1991 is based on mid-year population estimates for those years, comparison with 1981 and earlier is based on census results. Note: The 1981 census missed 1,005,000 residents in wholly absent households which may have had a smaller average size Slide 5 Here is part of the graph as released on July 16 before correction on the 20 th. Ive added the arrow. I guess 1991 & 2001 census used here. Slide 6 And here is the second (and third) numbers Scotland, released late (and Northern Ireland) 5.2 million in 2011 (1.8 in NI so UK is 63.1 m, up up) 190,600 more than the census in 2001 (the quality of last census in Scotland remains unquestioned) This figure is NOT census Which was 5.295 million Scotlands population has seen a continuous increase in recent years, partly because there have been more births than deaths, but mainly because more people have moved to Scotland than have left. This trend continued in 2011, with migration largely responsible for an increase of 0.6 per cent in the population. At 5,254,800 the population is now the highest ever recorded, 14,000 higher than the previous high in 1974. http://www.egovmonitor.com/node/53051 http://www.egovmonitor.com/node/53051 Slide 7 Explaining the England and Wales difference mostly more women Comparing rolled forward (MYE) and census. The difference is made up of 144,000 fewer males and 332,000 fewer females in MYE For men, more in the 10 to 19 and 30 to 39 age groups but less in 20-29 so maybe not recent migrants but good times migrants? For women the pattern is similar but elevated, more in general reflecting more women with degrees worldwide maybe? Slide 8 Almost all the discrepancy is in under 40 age groups ONS (2012) Explaining the Difference between the 2011 Census Estimates and the Rolled-Forward Population Estimates, 16 June 2012 Slide 9 Not counting folk in (immigration) is given as a key reason, but is this it? It seems that the remaining 175,000 is therefore attributable to IPS underestimation. This could be due to underestimating immigration or overestimating emigration. The emigration component is not examined in any detail in this current report, but will be discussed in a more detailed report for England and Wales due to be published in December 2012. (the bulk excluding Irish underestimation) Could there be quite a few people who live in England and Wales, and it is their Main home, but they also live somewhere else, and sometimes that is their Main home too? Are we likely to start seeing double and triple counting? The 2001 mid year estimate from a decade ago is now up-rated by 209,000! Slide 10 The NHS count in more (Flag 4s) from abroad, but remember, they counted in more within England too I remember NHS pop Counts Being 18% higher In some areas than actual counts when first used. Slide 11 Can we trust it? As a count of who is here: Yes (we can) - but, some of those who are here may also be elsewhere too. The official confidence intervals reported on the 56.1 million figure is +/- 83,000. If people were billiard balls being counted in a swimming pool, sampled and re-sampled I would quote this. As they are people I wont. Key source is: Baillie, M., Brown, J., Taylor, A. and Abbott, O. (2010) An evaluation of Bootstrapping for Variance Estimation. Internal Report. [a 2012 re-evaluation of the methods are needed now we know that 2001 estimates were out]. We also need to know about international double-counting rates. Slide 12 The extreme confidence widths Broadland *0.60% North Norfolk *0.62% Horsham0.62% Chichester0.65% Arun0.65% Liverpool3.39% Hammersmith and Fulham3.44% Camden3.49% Plymouth3.59% Kensington and Chelsea 3.79% *on the ground not so dull(my summer holidays/fieldwork) Slide 13 What does the census tell us? I wrote an abstract in June 2012 for this talk before the release: If the number is similar to current population estimates for the UK in 2011 then it will be argued that the demographic pattern is more similar to that experienced from 1930 to 1934 when the UK did not lose that many people, because events elsewhere were often just as bad. If the number is lower than current estimates that would suggest that what has occurred is similar to the last three recessions, and at least demographically this Great recession is less like a global economic depression. Slide 14 1930-31 net emigration despite depression (apologies for miss-spelling in original!) (Source: Unequal health Policy Press, 2013) Slide 15 Contrast this with: [Environment and Planning A, 2007, volume 39, page 1024] When the 2001 Census results were first published the Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported that there were 58 789194 people living in the United Kingdom in spring 2001. This was almost exactly a million more than had been estimated to be living there in 1991 57 770 226 but more than a million fewer than had previously been thought to be living in the United Kingdom in 2001 . The population had grown by a million in ten years, rather than by more than two million as we had thought. National estimates of population change in the decade appeared to be 105% awry Slide 16 Is it possible that more people are calling two countries home People who have one home here, say in term time, or summer? or Who still say Auf Wiedersehen, Pet (note Liverpool in the list). Ignore the blue crosses (% scale) Slide 17 Figures are old annual population growth estimates. The UK appears out of line - slow acceleration (Angus Madisons data - was from 2010) 2007 20082009 0.08%0.07%0.05%Austria 0.13%0.11%0.10%Belgium 0.32%0.30%0.30%Denmark 0.14%0.12%0.10%Finland 0.61%0.59%0.56%France -0.03%-0.04%-0.05%Germany 0.02%0.00%-0.03%Italy 0.48%0.45%0.42%Netherlands 0.37%0.36%0.36%Norway 0.12%0.11%0.08%Spain 0.16%0.15%0.17%Sweden 0.41%0.35%0.30%Switzerland 0.285%0.286%0.287% United Kingdom 1.15%1.14%1.12%Ireland 0.17%0.15%0.13%Greece 0.35%0.32%0.29%Portugal Slide 18 This graphic was made in 2010 http://moritz.stefaner.eu/ projects/remixing-rosling/ http://moritz.stefaner.eu/ projects/remixing-rosling/ Slide 19 Fertility in the last ten years in the UK has risen unusually Slide 20 In historic context a blip But the reason why UK has had growth compared to Germany Source: Dorling, D. The population of the UK (November 2012) Slide 21 The first 2011 analysis key statistics was done in 1 week Ludi Simpson and Stephen Jivrajs work: on behalf of the Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity at The University of Manchester, had analysed the results and determined that every single ethnic minority group within England and Wales had become more dispersed geographically despite rising in numbers in most cases. The same was true of every religion group except for the Jewish religionCentre on Dynamics of Ethnicity at The University of Manchester Slide 22 In January Ben Hennig and I found that the census suggested polarise in London (see next slide) It also confirmed that housing tenure was polarising, mass private renting occuring Kensington and Chelsea was emptying Life expectancy may not be polarising (however real rise in deaths occurring now) And shock horror not everyone speaks English. But many users have been cut. Slide 23 Poverty, wealth and place 2001-2011 Data: UK 2011 Census Released December 2012 Megacity London: Ever more growing, ever more unequal? Middle Exclusive Wealthy Breadline Poor Absolute differences to 2001: 10.8% increase in exclusive wealth; 19.2% increase in breadline poverty; 2.1% decline in Middle households Excl. Wealthy change Middle change Breadline Poor change Core Poor change* London +0.2%-4.7%+4.5%+1.2% Inner London +0.3%-0.2%-0.1%-0.5% Outer London +0.0%-7.4%+7.4%+2.2% * Subset of Breadline Poor Slide 24 The tenets of injustice: 1.Elitism is essential for economic efficiency? 2.Exclusion necessary - the poor will always be with us no matter how rich we are. Because we cannot afford to alleviate poverty? The timing matters - How Big A Cut Is This? HOWEVER not that is is a projection as GDP Has shrunk and as public spending has not been Cut quite as fast as the government planned the 2011 And 2012 falls should not appear as steep as this. Slide 25 Those of the worlds 25 richest large countries which are in Europe + USA Slide 26 On replacing most of the census with a survey news from Canada these data would not be strictly comparable to the data from previous censuses, although comparisons would continue to be made in the absence of anything else; and, second, data for some smaller sub-groups of the population and smaller geographical areas may not be released because of unacceptable quality.

Search related