Undermining our data:

implications for trust in the

census

Lynn Killick, Prof Alistair S Duff, Prof Hazel

Hall & Prof Mark Deakin

@sherpalynn

• Context for the study

• The online tool

• Results

Image © www.familydetective.net

Image © www.ushmm.org holocaust memorial museum

• IMAGE © NATIONAL RECORDS SCOTLAND

IMAGE © OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS

Context for change

• Austerity

• Criticism of the census outputs

• New technologies

Design principles for Census

2021• Designing for online first

• Maximising appropriate use if

administrative data in all areas of

operation & processing

• Making the results available more quickly

than results from the 2011 Census and

completing the production of the full suite

of results more quickly as well

So what?

• Will online first affect participation?

• What do people think about the use of

administrative data?

• What do people think about the

involvement of the private sector?

• Today I will discuss the findings of an

online survey

approach

Online Survey

• Designed and distributed using Novi Survey

• 22 questions plus limited demographic survey

• Anonymous returns

• Promoted via Twitter #PhDchat , LinkedIn and

Facebook using predominantly Scottish

focused groups

approach

Key question areas

• Questions designed to build on prior studies of public perception:– The census as a public sector exercise

– Limits on access to census data

– The distinctions between sectors (public v private)

– The trust (of the public) in confidentiality statements

• In addition:– Accessibility

– Information security

approach

What the people said• Majority viewed completion of the census as a civic duty

• Legal compulsion not a driver, but it does promote participation

• Majority of respondents happy to share personal data with the census

• Fewer respondents content for administrative data to be shared with the census

• Concerns regarding data security but generally trusting of census office – slightly more so than government in general

• Welcoming of online move…..but recognised barriers for others

Yep. But we need to ensure information and digital literacy issues are addressed in order for it to work!

I feel strongly that the information gathered is not used by private for profit orgs. As I do not feel this is in keeping with the role of the census.

References• Aly, G., & Roth, K. H. (2004). The Nazi census : identification and control in the Third Reich. Temple University Press,

Philadelphia. • Baffour, B., King, T., & Valente, P. (2013). The Modern Census: evolution, examples and evaluation. International Statistical

Review, 81(3), 407–425. • Boyle, P., & Dorling, D. (2004). Guest editorial: the 2001 UK census: remarkable resource or bygone legacy of the “pencil and

paper era”? Area, 36, 101–110. • Coleman, D. (2013). The twilight of the census. Population and Development Review, 8, 334–351. • Courtland, S. (1985). Census confidentiality: Then and now. Government Information Quarterly, 2(4), 407–418. • Cullen, R. (2009). Culture, identity and information privacy in the age of digital government. Online Information Review,

33(3), 405–421.• Cullen, R., & Reilly, P. (2008). Information Privacy and Trust in Government: A citizen-based perspective from New Zealand.

Journal of Information Technology & Politics. • Dugmore, K., Furness, P., Leventhal, B., & Moy, C. (2011). Beyond the 2011 census in the United Kingdom: with an

international perspective. • Heeney, C. (2012). Breaching the Contract? Privacy and the UK Census. The Information Society. • Holt, T. (2007). The Statistics and Registration Service Act. Significance, 4(4), 182–183. • Introna, L. D. (1997). Privacy and the Computer: Why we need privacy in the information society. Metaphilosophy, 28(3),

259-275• Killick, L., Hall, H., Duff, A. S., & Deakin, M. (2016). The census as an information source in public policy-making. Journal of

Information Science, 0165551516628471–. • McMillen, D. (2004). Privacy, confidentiality, and data sharing: Issues and distinctions. Government Information Quarterly,

21(3), 359–382. • Seltzer, W., & Anderson, M. (2001). The dark side of numbers: The role of population data systems in human rights abuses.

Social Research. • Simpson, S., & Dorling, D. (1994). Those missing millions: implications for social statistics of non-response to the 1991

Census. Journal of Social Policy. • Singer, E., & Neugebauer, R. J. (2003). Attitudes and behavior the impact of privacy and confidentiality concerns on

participation in the 2000 Census. • White, I. (2009). The 2011 Census taking shape: methodological and technological developments. Population Trends, (136),

64–72.