IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/deveza/v33y2016i5p600-612.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The debate on the future of the population census: Relevance for South Africa?

Author

Listed:
  • A J Christopher

Abstract

The cancellation of the Canadian census long-form questionnaire in 2010 and its subsequent reinstatement in 2015 resulted in a vigorous international debate on the future of the mandatory census. Questions concerning state invasions of personal privacy, party political interference and public trust and cooperation in state data-gathering were raised. As a result, alternative forms of demographic data collection were explored and the experiences of other countries examined. National population registers and non-mandatory surveys offered alternatives, but each had their own distinct disadvantages. South Africa has continued to conduct mandatory detailed censuses since 1994 and the enumerations have encountered little political opposition because they are presented as essentially nation-building exercises providing credible and relevant data, upon which national policies may be based and monitored. At present there is little incentive to change the current format of statistical collection in the absence of a viable alternative.

Suggested Citation

  • A J Christopher, 2016. "The debate on the future of the population census: Relevance for South Africa?," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5), pages 600-612, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:deveza:v:33:y:2016:i:5:p:600-612
    DOI: 10.1080/0376835X.2016.1203761
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0376835X.2016.1203761
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0376835X.2016.1203761?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:deveza:v:33:y:2016:i:5:p:600-612. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CDSA20 .

    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.