2011 UK Census

We now need to get some detailed feedback and opinion about the form and level of 2001/2001 comparisons you want to see as part of 2011 output.

We are now beginning work on assessing the comparability of intercensal data and the factors and issues that must be considered and overcome in order to allow users to access and make the most effective use of intercensal comparisons.

So, this is your chance to let us know your concerns and needs at an early stage, and really influence the direction of development and the form and content of comparable data delivery.

Some specific areas we are keen to have your views about are:

• Do you want to see intercensal change counts in significant volume (excluding the sort of simple total population change figures in 2001 output) included in an integrated form within tables as part of standard 2011 output? If so, to what extent - what sort of variables and to what level of geographical detail?

• Perhaps you would prefer not to have 2011 tables 'muddied' with the inclusion of change data, but instead will want to be able to access data via a system (perhaps web based) that lets you select some 2011 data and then select some 2001 data, and then perform a comparison?

• How will you approach comparing data from 2001 and 2011?

1. Will you want to view 2011 data for 2011 geographical areas, and then see what has changed by projecting forward 2001 data and comparing?
2. Will you want to view 2001 data for 2001 geography, and then see how 2011 figures compare when can are cast back to 2001 areas?
3. Will you want to do both, or something else?

• What range and depth of standard geography do you want to see comparable data for?

• What type of variables to you want to be able to compare, and to what depth of classification?

• Greater volume and granularity of geography and classification may introduce disclosure issues, and certainly the integrity of comparability will be effected. Where this, or the effect of differences in methodology, definitions, and classifications becomes so great that the integrity of comparability is degraded too much, and exact comparisons are not possible, would you want to see some form of 'indicator of change' available instead? If so, what from might this take?

But, we are not just interested in answers to these questions. So if you have any others views about intercensal data comparability, let us know.

See other posts similar to this one: