Changing ethnic identities
in England and Wales (1991-2001)
For LS workshop on ethnicity, 11 Nov. 2005 at LS
Dr Yaojun Li
BA MA MPhil (Oxon) DPhil (Oxon)
Reader in Sociological Analysis
Department of Sociology
Birmingham University
Email: y.li.3@bham.ac.uk
Tel: 0121-4158625
Web: http://www.sociology.bham.ac.uk/staff/yaojun_li.htm
Ethnic identity changes by sex (% by row)
Table 2
Ethnic identity distribution 1991-2001 by sex (percentage by row)
Ethnic Group 91
Male
White
Black Caribbean
Black African
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Chinese
Black Other
Other Other
Female
White
Black Caribbean
Black African
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Chinese
Black Other
Other Other
Ethnicity 2001
White
99.8
***
9.1
9.6***
***
2.2
***
1.9
1.3***
0.9***
46.2***
51.0***
Black
Caribbean
0.1
81.2
2.6
0.3
0
0
0
17.4
2.1
Black
African
0.1
0.7
80.9
0.2
0.2
0
0
2.8
0.9
Indian
0.1
0.2
1.8***
***
91.5
***
1.2
1.0**
0
5.7***
5.4
Pakistani
0.1
*
0.2
0.5***
0.5
93.2
0.5
0
3.9***
2.7
Bangladeshi
0.1
0
0
0.1
0.2
95.1
0
1.2
0.7
Chinese
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
93.0
0.4
1.8
Black
Other
0.1
8.0
3.7
0.1
0
0
0
7.8
0.8
Other
Other
0.2
0.9
1.3
5.5
3.6
2.4**
6.3
15.2
35
Total
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
N
175,050
1,287
470
3,839
1,957
651
480
622
1,587
99.8
10.8
11.6
1.6
2.3
1.6
2.3
44.4
48.5
0.1
78.9
2.0
0.2
0
0
0
18.8
3.0
0.1
0.6
79.0
0.3
0.2
0
0
3.3
1.0
0.1
0.3
2.3
93.3
0.6
0.7
0
7.8
5.4
0.1
0
0
0.4
94.3
0.7
0
2.8
2.7
0.1
0
0
0.1
0
96.2
0
0.7
0.3
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
91.8
0.7
1.3
0.1
8.6
3.7
0.1
0
0
0
8.4
1.3
0.2
1.0
1.6
4.4
2.8
1.1
6.1
13.6
36.8
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
192,922
1,714
571
3,866
1,893
774
498
740
1,693
Note:
1. Based on recode: (1/6=1)(12=2)(13=3)(8=4)(9=5)(10=6)(15=7)(14=8)(7,11,16=9).
2. Significance tests are conducted for the gender differences in each of the corresponding cells. Figures in bold indicate
greater female than male changes, and figures in italics indicate greater male than female changes in the respective cells.
3. *p<0.05, ** p<0.01 and *** p<0.001.
Table 3
Ethnic identity distribution 1991-2001 (percentage by row)
Ethnic Group 91
White
Black Caribbean
Black African
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Chinese
Black Other
Other Other
Ethnicity 2001
White
99.8
10.1
10.7
1.9
2.1
1.5
1.6
45.2
49.7
Black Black
Black Other
Caribbean African Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Chinese Other Other
0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1 0.1 0.2
79.9
0.6 0.3
0.1
0
0 8.3 1.0
2.3 79.9 2.1
0.2
0
0 3.7 1.5
0.2
0.3 92.4
0.5
0.1
0 0.1 4.9
0
0.2 0.9
93.8
0.1
0
0 3.2
0
0 0.8
0.6
95.7
0
0 1.7
0
0
0
0
0
92.4
0 6.2
18.2
3.1 6.8
3.3
0.9
0.6 8.1 14.3
2.5
1.0 5.4
2.7
0.5
1.6 1.1 35.9
All
N
100 367,972
100 3,001
100 1,041
100 7,705
100 3,850
100 1,425
100
978
100 1,362
100 3,280
Note:
1. Recode eth01cat16 (1/6=1)(12=2)(13=3)(8=4)(9=5)(10=6)(15=7)(14=8)(7,11,16=9) into eth01cat9.
2. For males and females combined.
3. We shall code the cells in pink as moving to White, cells in red (on the diagonal) as retainers and all others within the dotted
line as changers to other ethnicities.
Ethnic identity changes 91-01
Table4 Ethnic identity change by demographic-socio-economic factors (% by row)
Ethnicity at 1991
White
Black Caribbean
Black African
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Chinese
Black Other
Retainer
To White
To Other
N
99.9
78.2
78.6
95.7
94.8
94.6
96.3
8.9
0
12.7
12.5
3.1
3.5
3.2
3.1
54.2
.1
9.1
8.8
1.2
1.7
2.2
0.6
36.9
376163
3142
1077
7575
3912
1474
943
1255
Sex
Male
Female
Age in 1991
Under 20
20-29
30-39
40+
Religion in 2001
Christian
Other
No religion
Not stated
Nativity
Foreign born
Native born
99.2
99.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
187962
207849
98.6
98.9
99.3
99.6
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.7
0.4
0.2
105730
61850
62479
165482
99.5
96.4
99.2
97.5
0.3
1.1
0.5
1.4
0.2
2.5
0.3
1.1
300093
16263
52941
26244
96.4
99.4
1.8
0.3
1.9
0.3
24268
371273
Heath status 91-01
Y91Y01
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Owner occupier 91-01
Y91Y01
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Marital status 91-01
Y91Y01
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
HH head status 91-01
Y91Y01
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
99.2
99.3
98.3
99.4
0.4
0.3
0.9
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.3
304468
57146
7836
26091
99.5
98.8
98.7
98.5
0.3
0.6
0.7
0.9
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.7
264586
31734
32800
66421
99.6
99.4
99.1
98.8
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.6
162131
34890
33067
165453
99.4
99.4
99.2
99.0
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
116389
33839
71699
173614
Degree status 91-01
Y91Y01
N91Y01
N91N01
Employment status 91-01
Y91Y01
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Class status 91-01
Y91Y01
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Deprivation in 1991
Top quintile
2nd
3rd
4th
Bottom quintile
Ward-level %BME 91-01
%91 GE %01
%91 LT % 01
99.5
98.9
99.2
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.4
22793
36384
336364
98.5
99.5
98.9
98.9
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.5
139392
53544
58102
144503
99.6
99.5
99.1
99.1
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.4
49022
19252
49156
278111
99.8
99.7
99.6
99.3
98.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.9
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.9
57413
65041
73431
89754
110059
98.8
99.3
0.9
0.4
0.5
0.4
66558
328983
Table
Logit regression models
Model 1
Sex (ref. = male)
Female
Nativity (ref. = native born)
Foreign born
Age in 1991 (ref. = 40+)
Under 20
20-29
30-39
Religion in 2001 (ref. = Christian)
Other religion
No religion
Not stated
Health status (ref. = Y91Y01)
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Owner occupation status (ref. = Y91Y01)
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Marital status (ref. = Y91Y01)
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
HH head status (ref. = Y91Y01)
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Degree status (ref. = Y91Y01)
N91Y01
N91N01
Employment status (ref. = Y91Y01)
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Class status (ref. = Y91Y01)
Y91N01
N91Y01
N91N01
Social deprivation in 1991 (ref. = top quintile)
2nd
3rd
4th
Bottom quintile
Ethnic concentration (ref. = %1991≥ %2001)
%1991 < %2001
Constant
Pseudo R2
Model comparison
N
.044
Model 2
.013
Model 3
.011
2.026***
2.269***
1.974***
1.317***
.884***
.741***
1.294***
1.007***
.869***
1.246***
.864***
.753***
.337***
.175*
1.369***
.289**
.191**
1.363***
-.047
.189**
1.322***
.019
.749***
.093
-.074
.696***
-.055
-.109
.614***
-.115
.341***
.642***
.983***
.316***
.636***
.909***
.291***
.389***
.604***
.308**
.289**
.725***
.263*
.303**
.680***
.264*
.265*
.647***
-.083
-.066
-.096
-.082
-.049
-.025
.051
.092
.088
.075
.310*
.173
.452
.267*
.157
.405
-.097
.042
-.032
-.118
-.002
-.128
.003
.224
.725***
1.345***
-.328***
-7.616***
.110
2
p-value
393954
-7.822***
.111
34.35
<.000
393954
-8.031**
.132
421.52b
<.000
393931