Click here to start

Table of contents

 2001 CENSUS INTERACTION DATA: RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT Presentation Introduction: 2001 Census interaction data Introduction: Developments from 1991 interaction data In comparison with 1991 Census, there are a similar number of tables but: (1) considerably more counts in 2001, (2) all the counts are 100% in 2001, (3) OA level e.g. Tables and counts from 2001 SMS Level 1 and 1991 SMS Set 2 (Districts) Slide 7 Example: SMS allow spatial disaggregation of net migration rates and expose different processes occurring Slide 9 Slide 10 Example: Commuting flows to City and Holbeck from within Y&H 2001 Census interaction data issues: General Geographical units used in 2001 SMS/SWS/STS 2001 Census interaction data issues: Adjustment for Disclosure Control Removal or modification of planned tables SCAM Impact of SCAM on OA-OA migration flows Impact of SCAM on OA-OA commuting flows Impact of SCAM: Summary of OA-OA data for migrants with destinations in E&W and commuters with origins in E&W Other effects of SCAM Impact of SCAM when comparing tables: e.g. SMS at level 2 Comparing total migrants in MG201 and MG203: Distribution of absolute differences between the two Impact of SCAM when comparing flows between spatial scales Net migration comparison for London boroughs UK internal migration in 2000-01: How many migrants? SCAM effects when making comparisons SCAM comparisons at level 1 Table MG101 Comparison of flows in interior cells in MG101 In-migration table totals from MG101 2001 Census interaction data issues Problems of Comparisons between Censuses Problems of changing definition and availability - 1 Problems of changing definition and availability - 2 Problems of the measurement and adjustment of counts Problems of inconsistency in geographical areas Hierarchy of zones and re-estimation Change (%) in migration in GB between 1990-91 and 2000-01 by age and sex Total Migration in GB Compared 1990-01 and 2000-01 GB Net migration (adjusted) for intermediate zones in 1990-91 and 2000-01 But not all the problems are resolved, eg: Another example: calculating the effect of migration on the socio-economic profile of cities … so university cities continually gain students, and see outmigration of people in Higher M&P jobs Conclusions: Looking ahead Recommendations for 2011 outputs Recommendations for 2011 questions 2006 Census Test in Scotland Slide 47