IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v167y2004i2p209-228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An alternative view of the 2001 census and future census taking

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Redfern

Abstract

Summary. The 2001 census in the UK asked for a return of people ‘usually living at this address’. But this phrase is fuzzy and may have led to undercount. In addition, analysis of the sex ratios in the 2001 census of England and Wales points to a sex bias in the adjustments for net undercount—too few males in relation to females. The Office for National Statistics's abandonment of the method of demographic analysis for the population of working ages has allowed these biases to creep in. The paper presents a demographic account to check on the plausibility of census results. The need to revise preliminary estimates of the national population over a period of years following census day—as experienced in North America and now in the UK—calls into question the feasibility of a one‐number census. Looking to the future, the environment for taking a reliable census by conventional methods is deteriorating. The UK Government's proposals for a population register open up the possibility of a Nordic‐style administrative record census in the longer term.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Redfern, 2004. "An alternative view of the 2001 census and future census taking," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 167(2), pages 209-228, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:167:y:2004:i:2:p:209-228
    DOI: 10.1046/j.1467-985X.2003.02041.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-985X.2003.02041.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1046/j.1467-985X.2003.02041.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. J. Brown & I. D. Diamond & R. L. Chambers & L. J. Buckner & A. D. Teague, 1999. "A methodological strategy for a one‐number census in the UK," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 162(2), pages 247-267.
    2. Philip Redfern, 2001. "A Bayesian Model for Estimating Census Undercount, Taking Emigration Data from Foreign Censuses," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 69(2), pages 277-301, August.
    3. Philip Redfern, 1989. "Population Registers: Some Administrative and Statistical Pros and Cons," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 152(1), pages 1-28, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bernard Baffour & Thomas King & Paolo Valente, 2013. "The Modern Census: Evolution, Examples and Evaluation," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 81(3), pages 407-425, December.
    2. Clark, Stephen D. & Rey, Sergio, 2017. "Temporal dynamics in local vehicle ownership for Great Britain," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 30-37.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Len Cook, 2004. "Discussion on the meeting on 'The 2001 census and beyond'," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 167(2), pages 229-248.
    2. Fiona Steele & James Brown & Ray Chambers, 2002. "A controlled donor imputation system for a one‐number census," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 165(3), pages 495-522, October.
    3. Chipperfield James & Brown James & Bell Philip, 2017. "Estimating the Count Error in the Australian Census," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(1), pages 43-59, March.
    4. Bernard Baffour & Thomas King & Paolo Valente, 2013. "The Modern Census: Evolution, Examples and Evaluation," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 81(3), pages 407-425, December.
    5. Gerritse Susanna C. & Heijden Peter G.M. van der & Bakker Bart F.M., 2015. "Sensitivity of Population Size Estimation for Violating Parametric Assumptions in Log-linear Models," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 31(3), pages 357-379, September.
    6. D. H. Judson, 2007. "Information integration for constructing social statistics: history, theory and ideas towards a research programme," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 170(2), pages 483-501, March.
    7. Lucie Dostál & Siegfried Gabler & Matthias Ganninger & Ralf Münnich, 2016. "Frame Correction Modelling with Applications to the German Register-Assisted Census 2011," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 43(3), pages 904-920, September.
    8. James Brown & Owen Abbott & Ian Diamond, 2006. "Dependence in the 2001 one‐number census project," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(4), pages 883-902, October.
    9. D. J. Martin, 2007. "Editorial: Census present and future," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 170(2), pages 263-266, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:167:y:2004:i:2:p:209-228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.