Blog

Earlier this year the UK Census Offices ran an on-line survey linked to this website which asked users about their use and experience of 2001 Census outputs and their high level requirements for 2011 Census outputs. Initial findings are posted below.

RESPONDENT PROFILE

Overall, 529 questionnaires were completed and submitted.

64% of responses to the survey were from individual census users, 33% were from single organisations and 4% were from multiple organisations.

4% and 10% of respondents exclusively use and are interested in Census data for N. Ireland and for Scotland, respectively.

The largest proportion of responses came from census users working for Local Authorities,-44%. All other sectors of census users were represented- Central Government 4%; Regional Government 3%; Academic 11%; Health 9%; Commercial 10%; Third Sector 9%; Member of the public 4%; and Other (7%).

We, at GROS, are keen to get feedback from users on any issues focussed specifically on census outputs for Scotland. While the recent online survey included some questions relating to each individual country in the UK, we would like to use this blog posting to provide users with the opportunity to expand on any particular Scottish issues. For example, we would like to know what you think went well and not so well with the 2001 Census outputs issued by GROS? What would be your top priorities for improvements to Scottish census outputs come 2011? Any thoughts on how Scottish census outputs should best interface with other data such as Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics (SNS)? - e.g. a consolidated single source of census and non-census data, or building in better links between the SNS, Scottish Government and other official statistics websites, and a 'son of SCROL'? Any other suggestions for improved or alternative ways of accessing Scottish census data?

Ann-Marie Meikle.
GROS

The definitions volume for 2001 Census (available printed and on the National Statistics website) included a section on ‘comparability with the 1991 Census’ (see page 19 of the definitions volume http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/census2001/definitions_chapters_1...). To inform users where a direct comparison between the Censuses should not be assumed summary information was provided on new and revised questions, and an indication of where the questions were essentially unchanged.
Was this summary information adequate?
Is there any additional information to aid comparison between the 2001 Census and the 2011 Census that you would like to see provided for use with the next Census?

Our aim is to provide metadata that is useful and appropriate to our users. To guide us it is helpful to know what changes/new information or products would be desirable to improve on the metadata provided for the previous Census. Your opinions matter.

Generally we have good feedback from our customers on our Census Customer Support service but we are open to ideas on any improvements that could be made for 2011 user support. For example, some users have said that they would have liked to have been offered a census training course to explain the range of 2001 statistical outputs and metadata and how to locate and access these. Although we are at an early stage in our thinking about 2011 Census output products and services and delivery systems, we would be interested to know if there will be any demand for this kind of service for 2011 output and if so what kind of training would be most likely to meet user needs? On-line training or a course delivered “face to face” to a small group of users? Or perhaps regional day seminars delivered to larger groups? And, or course, the fundamental question of whether there would there be a willingness on the part of organisations to pay for the delivery of training courses?

Even this far in advance, it is clear that the 2011 Census will provide an invaluable - and interesting - snapshot of life in the United Kingdom. Crucial to making that information useful (and well used) will be making census outputs intelligble for a wide range of users, from specialised statisticians and researchers right through to interested citizens and schoolchildren. Against this background, there is also the constantly changing technological backdrop of the Web, which will play a key role as a delivery channel. So - how should 2011 Census data be presented to users and in what formats?

European Regulations govern the delivery of Census data to Eurostat from member states, and in the past the UK Census Offices(ONS, GROS and NISRA collectively)were obliged to provide Eurostat with a specific set of tables.

New regulations will come into effect for the next Census that will require the National Statistics Institutes of member states to make their data available in data cubes as specified by Eurostat. Member states have contributed to the development of these specifications. Eurostat plans to build a web portal that can access data held by those member states who have web systems that are able to exchange data automatically with other websites, and are carrying out some pilot studies.

Following on from the close of the User Output Survey last week we have started to analyse the responses we received and we will be posting initial results at the beginning of July. In the meantime we would like to know if there were other output issues or other aspects of the included issues which we should have asked about.

(As a reminder the survey focussed on high level issues and asked firstly about previous experience and use of census data and secondly about high level requirements for 2011 census data including 2001/2011 comparisons, access and dissemination, metadata, SDC and output priorities).

Disclosure Control is a necessary evil. We have an obligation to protect people’s information and if we didn’t they wouldn’t complete their Census forms. Applying disclosure control though means that we are always going to lose something - but there are choices and trade-offs to be made. The survey asked which SDC features users consider to be most important for example, maintaining additivity in tables, consistency across tables, counts that are as near as possible to true counts, a method that is easy to understand, being able to take account of the effects of the method in analysis and the relative importance of these features. Users from different communities may have different priorities and we will be reporting on this and giving feedback to the methodologists who are evaluating the short-listed SDC methods in terms of the protection they give and the effects on the data -a risk/utility continuum.

The survey of high level output requirements has now closed. Thank you to everyone who took the time to respond. Your views will now be collated and analysed. The results will be published on this website as they become available with initial findings being published at the beginning of July.

This output consultation website will remain open. We are keen to engage as widely as possible with users on output issues so please continue to visit the site, see what other users are saying and give us your views.

Presentation of statistical data in the form of 'cubes' has become a common tool used by National Statistical Institutions (NSIs) in the last few years. Specific applications and the range of associated functionality vary between NSIs depending on the data, it's use, and the depth of development and history of implementation.

The potential benefits to be gained from this area of continuing develop are obviously an important consideration for the presentation and web delivery of data from the 2011 Census. Decisions in this area should be strongly influenced by the depth and range of functionality that are either required, or that users feel are at least desirable.

What experience of using data presented in cubes have users had? What are some of the best examples, and some of the worst? What specific features or functions are considered to be crucial, and what would be a nice option?