Secondary Analysis

Research on Ethnicity

Using Government Data & SARs

Reza Afkhami

ESDS Government & SARs

1st November University of Bristol

Outline

• Issues and Problems in Secondary Analysis of Ethnic Minority Data

• Some Research Exemplars

• Comparability of 1991/2001 SARs ethnicity Classifications

• ESDS Resources for ethnicity

Issues in Secondary Analysis of Ethnic Minority Data (1)

• Sample size • Boosted samples and weighting • Aggregation of surveys

• Country of birth • Geography

Issues in Secondary Analysis of Ethnic Minority Data (2)

• Change of question wording • Consistency over time

• Mixed and other Categories• Age

Age profile of ethnic groups Source: Vivienne Avery

Distribution of Ethnic Minority Groups by Age, 2001/2% Under 16 % 16-64 % 65 and over

White 19 65 16Black Caribbean 25 67 9Black African 33 66 2Indian 22 71 6Pakistani 35 61 4Bangladeshi 38 58 3

Annual Local Area Labour Force Survey, 2001/2, ONS

Research Exemplars

• Labour Market• Pension• Identity• Health• Women• Income• Household formation

Research Exemplars: Labour Market

Questions• How is the role of human capital

(education) in the labour market attainment for ethnic minorities?

• How is the ethnic minority disadvantage in the labour market?

Unemployment rates in UK by ethnic group and sex, ALALFS 2001/02

Source: Vivienne Avery

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

White

Mixed

Indian

Pakistani

Bangladeshi

Other Asian

Black Caribbean

Black African

Other

Men

Women

Research Exemplars: Pension

Questions:• How do private pension prospects vary among

ethnic groups?

• Is women’s disadvantage the same in each ethnic group?

• What explains minority ethnic disadvantage in pensions?

Percentage contributing to a private pension by ethnic group. Men and women 20-59

Source: Jay Ginn Family Resource Survey 1994-96

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

White

Indian

Black

Chinese/oth

Pakistani

Bangladeshi

Men Women

Research Exemplars: Economic Activity for Women

Source: Dale, et al

0102030405060708090

100

Eco

no

mic

Act

ivit

y Not seeking, would notlike to work

Not seeking, would like towork

Seeking unavailable

ILO Unemployed

Employed or self-employed

Economic activity and employment

women aged 19-60 Spring QLFS, 2000-2, excl. full-time students

01020304050607080

UnemplPart-timeFull-time

Source: Angela Dale and Jo Lindley

Economic activity by degree level qualifications

women 19-60, excl.FT students, 2000-2

0102030405060708090

100

White BlackCar/Oth

BlackAfrican

Indian P & B

no degreedegree

Key points about ethnic minority women

– Unemployment particularly high amongst minority ethnic women

– Part-time working highest for white women

– Black Caribbean women have highest levels of economic activity and highest levels of full-time working

– Pakistani and Bangladeshi women have lowest levels of economic activity

Research Exemplars: National Identity

• Meaning of ‘British’ in LFS questionnaire– Pertaining to UK state– Pertaining to mainland British state (excl Ireland)– Pertaining to territorial area of Britain– Pertaining to nation inclusive of others– Pertaining to nation exclusive of others– White– Pertaining to ‘cultural’ or other background qualifying

group defined by skin colour

Percentage reporting British National Identity by ethnic group LFS

N

Pakistani 69.4 447

Bangladeshi 67.0 176

Black Caribbean 66.4 440

Indian 65.0 758

Other Black 61.5 39

White and Asian 56.5 69

Other Mixed 48.9 45

White and Black Caribbean 48.3 89

White and Black African 45.2 31

Chinese 40.9 154

Other Asian 39.7 224

Black African 38.4 359

British 36.9 40396

Other 30.6 333

Other White 10.2 1747

Source: LFS 2000Q1 – 2004Q1. Excl. Northern Ireland. Ns are weighted John MacInnes

Research Exemplars: Health

• To compare the percentage of obese or overweight children within different ethnic and socio-economic groups

Interrelationships

Diabetes

Cardiovascular disease

Black Caribbean

S. Asian ethnicity

Obesity

Risk of obesity in boys by ethnic group Source: Saxena, et al.

Risk of obesity in girls by ethnic group Source: Saxena, et al.

Reported fair or bad health by ethnic group and age

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2-5 5-9 10-12 13-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-60 61-70 > 70

Caribbean Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Chinese White minority White English

Source: James Nazroo Health Survey for England 1999

Ethnic differences in equivalised household income

48% 45%

69%

90%

41%

27% 31%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Caribbean Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Chinese Whiteminority

WhiteEnglish

Bottom tertile Middle tertile Top tertile

Source: James Nazroo Health Survey for England 1999 Health Survey for England 1999

How household formation varies between ethnic groups and LADs ?

Tajar & Simpson (2005)

• Data: CAMS (The Controlled Access Microdata Sample). This is a 3% individual sample from the UK 2001 census data.

• One of the most common ways of summarising household patterns is by the use of headship rates – the proportion of those in a particular age, sex or other group who are designated as ‘head of household’.

Headship rate: England and Wales, 2001

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75+

Male

Female

Headship rates for England and Wales - 2001 All Households: Male

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

15-19 20-24 25-29 30-44 45-59 60-74 75+

Age

White

Caribbean

Pakistani

Indian

Bangladeshi

Headship rates for England and Wales - 2001 All Households: Female

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

15-19 20-24 25-29 30-44 45-59 60-74 75+

Age

Caribbean

White

Pakistani

Bangladeshi

Indian

Geographical effect

Ethnic groups Variance of the LAD effectWhite 0.032Indian 0.151

Pakistani 0.064Bangladeshi 0.036Caribbean 0.054

African 0.044Other Black 0.044

Chinese 0.129Other 0.083

Significant values in Bold

Conclusion

o Higher headship rate of Caribbean women in their thirties and forties compared to other ethnic groups for England and Wales and also for LADs: high number of lone parent Caribbean women.

o There are geographical variations within ethnic groups.

Ethnic group Comparison in 1991/2001 Census

• Ethnic group questions in 1991 and 2001

• Changes to ethnic identification

• Recommendations for comparing 1991 and 2001 Census ethnic groups

Ethnic group questions in 1991 and 2001

• Ethnicity question asked in 1991 census for England, Wales and Scotland

• All UK countries included ethnic question in 2001 census but questions in Scotland and Northern Ireland each differed from E&W

The 1991 Census ethnic group question asked in England, Wales and Scotland

The 2001 Census ethnic group question asked in England and Wales

Changes to ethnic identification

• The most stable categories; White, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Chinese.

• Less stable categories; the Black African and Black Caribbean groups

• The least stable; the ‘Other’ ethnic groups

Recommendations for comparing 1991 and 2001 Census ethnic

groups

• a ten-category classification; an eight category classification; a five-category classification; and a two-category classification.

• More groups combined; greater stability at the cost of losing the detail

• Balance between reliability and ethnic group detail depends on the specific analysis

Ten category classification

Eight category classification

Five category classification

Two category classification

ESDS Resources on Ethnicity

– LFS-Ethnicity Consistent over time

– GHS-Ethnicity Consistent over time

– Ethnicity Theme Page