PFII/2004/WS.1/13
Original: English
UNITED NATIONS
NATIONS UNIES
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS
Division for Social Policy and Development
Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
WORKSHOP ON DATA COLLECTION
AND DISAGGREGATION
FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
(New York, 19-21 January 2004)
Data collection pertaining to indigenous peoples: issues and challenges
By Jeremiah P. Bandah1
Introduction
1.
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in its report on the first session
called upon all concerned agencies and organisations to begin to disaggregate data on
indigenous people generally, and indigenous women and children specifically, in two
categories covering (i) programmes and services impacting indigenous peoples, and (ii)
fiscal allocations for indigenous peoples’ programmes and services (United Nations,
2002, para.6).
2.
Some basic data on indigenous people are available in a number of countries.
Several countries, for example, use population and housing censuses to gather
information on selected demographic and socio-economic characteristics of indigenous
people. Obtaining relevant and comparable statistical information on indigenous people,
however, still remains a challenge in many countries.
3.
The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of some of the main issues and
challenges related to the collection of data on indigenous people. Particular emphasis is
given to the three major sources used to collect these data and to some of their main
advantages and drawbacks. The paper also provides an overview of the data on national
and ethnic groups collected and disseminated through the Demographic Yearbook
system. National data collection practices specific to, among others, ethnicity, ancestry,
aboriginal and indigenous groups in the 2000 round of censuses are also presented.
II.
Data sources
4.
There are three main sources of statistics that are used to collect information on
indigenous peoples, namely, censuses, sample surveys and administrative records. We
briefly discuss these sources in the following paragraphs.
2.1. Population and housing censuses
5.
A population census, hereafter simply referred to as census, is the total process
of collecting, compiling, evaluating and disseminating demographic, social and other data
at a specified time covering all persons in a country or in a well-delimited part(s) of a
country (United Nations, 1998). A census is part of the fundamental statistical base of a
country. It can, therefore, be a major source of social statistics, with its obvious
advantage of providing data for small geographic units. A census is an ideal method for
providing information on size, composition and spatial distribution of the population in
addition to socio-economic and demographic characteristics. In general the census
collects information for each individual in households and each set of living quarters,
usually for the whole country or well defined parts of the country. The basic features of a
population and housing census include:
i.
Individuals in the population and each set of living quarters are enumerated
separately in the population.
ii.
Universality within a defined geographic area/territory. The population
census potentially covers the whole population in a clearly defined territory.
It should include every person present and/or usual residents depending on
whether the type of population count is de facto or de jure. In the absence of a
comprehensive population and administrative register it is the only source that
can provide small area statistics.
iii.
The enumeration has to be as simultaneous as possible. The persons and
dwellings should be enumerated with respect to the same well-defined
reference period.
iv.
Censuses are usually conducted at defined intervals. Most countries conduct
censuses after every 10 years while others after five years. This facilitates the
availability of comparable information at fixed intervals.
v.
Censuses provide information on size, composition and spatial distribution
of the population together with demographic and social characteristics. Such
information is usually available for small administrative domains/ areas.
vi.
They are also sources of sampling frames.
6.
While censuses have the advantage of providing information for smaller
geographic areas they cannot be repeated frequently, as a result information collected
through censuses can become outdated. It is against this background that, household
surveys provide a basis for updating some census information especially at national and
other large domain levels. In most cases only relatively simple topics are investigated in
a census and the number of questions is usually limited. Census information can
therefore be complemented by detailed information on complex topics from the
household surveys taking advantage of their small size and potential flexibility.
2.2. Sample surveys
7.
Sample surveys are a key source of data on socio-economic phenomena. They
are among the most flexible methods of data collection. In theory almost any subject can
be investigated through sample surveys. In this respect, specialized information
pertaining to indigenous issues can ably be collected through surveys. In sample surveys
part of the population is selected from which observations are made or data are collected
and then inferences are made to the whole population. With the potential of smaller
workloads than in censuses and the possibility of training fewer people more intensively,
household surveys can cover most subject matters in greater detail than censuses. As it is
not possible to meet and anticipate all data needs of a country through a census,
household surveys provide a mechanism for meeting the additional and emerging needs
on a continuous basis. The flexibility of household surveys, therefore, make them
excellent choices for meeting data users’ needs for statistical information which
otherwise would not be available, insufficient and perhaps unreliable.
8.
There are different types of household surveys that can be conducted to collect
data relevant to indigenous concerns, such as specialised surveys, multi-phase surveys,
multi-subject surveys and longitudinal surveys. The selection of a specific type of survey
will depend on a number of factors including, subject matter requirements, resources and
logistical considerations. Specialised surveys cover single subjects or issues such as timeuse, disability, nutrition etc.
2.3. Administrative Records
9.
Different types of statistics can be compiled from various administrative records
as by-products of administrative processes. Examples include health statistics compiled
from hospital records, employment statistics from employment exchange services, vital
statistics compiled from the civil registration system and education statistics from
enrolment reports of the ministry of education.
10.
The reliability of statistics from administrative records depends on the
completeness of the administrative records and the consistency of definitions and
concepts. It is therefore necessary to continuously improve and update the systems of
recording, compiling and analysing of such data. Wherever possible, it is advisable to
use the same definitions and concepts overtime and harmonize these with the definitions
and concepts used in other data sources. This would facilitate the comparability of data.
11.
While administrative records can be very cost-effective sources of data, such
systems are not well developed in many countries. This implies that in a majority of
cases such data are unreliable. Even if the administrative recording processes are
continuous for purposes of administration, the compilation of statistics is, in most cases,
secondary. Statistical requirements that need to be maintained such as standardisation of
concepts and definitions, adhering to timeliness and complete coverage are not usually
considered or adhered to.
12.
For most countries, information from administrative records is often limited in
content as their uses are more specifically designed for legal or administrative purposes.
A civil registration system is an example of an administrative system that many countries
have developed but with varying success. Countries with complete vital registration
systems, which include a component of vital registration, are able to produce periodic
reports on vital events, such as number of live births by sex, date and place of births,
number of deaths by age, sex, place of deaths and cause of death, marriages and divorces
etc.
13.
A population register maintains life databases of every person and household in a
country. The register is updated on a continuous basis when there are changes in the
characteristics of individuals and households. If such registers are combined with other
social registers they can be a source of rich information. Countries, which have
developed such systems, include Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Germany and
Sweden. For most of these countries censuses are based on the registration system.
14.
In many developing countries, while administrative records for various social
programmes can be cost-effective data source and an attractive proposition, they are not
well developed. In this case their complementary use with other sources is a big
challenge because of lack of standardized concepts, classification systems coupled with
selective and under coverage.
III.
Data collection and dissemination through the Demographic Yearbook
system
15.
The United Nations Statistics Division collects and disseminates data, mainly
demographic data, and in some cases national and ethnic composition of populations.
Although most of these data do not always explicitly identify indigenous peoples, they
provide some indication of such groups.
16.
Data on ethnic groups has been included in the 1956, 1963, 1964, 1971, 1979,
1983, 1988 and 1993 editions of the Demographic Yearbook. These statistics are based
on results from population and housing censuses.
3.1. Diverging terminology
17.
The 1956 and 1963 editions of the Demographic Yearbooks examined
indigenous populations indirectly in the context of “ethnic composition”. The 1956
Demographic Yearbook noted that these data “fail to take account of the many ethnicsubgroups with a diversity of culture patterns. They fail also to reflect the lack of
assimilation in some of the native born who maintain the cultural habits of their
forefathers”. Another common problem associated with these data is the lack of
international comparability.
18.
Since 1979 these data have been labeled as “national/or ethnic group”. The
technical notes included in the Demographic Yearbook, underscore the heterogeneous
nature of the statistics related to ethnicity by defining them as a single or combined
category of race, religion, colour, stock, tribe, ethnic origin, or ethnic nationality.
19.
Recognizing the multiple interpretation of the concept of ethnicity, the 1998
Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses lists a wide range
of criteria that are or can be used to identify ethnic groups. These include ethnic group
and nationality, race, colour, language, religion, customs of dress or eating, tribe or
various combinations of these characteristics. These criteria can have different meanings
for different countries and/or at different points in time. It is therefore, imperative; that
countries clearly specify the criteria used in the census reports such that the meaning of
the classification is discernible.
3.2. Uses of ethnicity data
20.
Despite the limitations of international comparability of data on ethnicity, due to
the use of different concepts in different countries that report these statistics there are
some general usage of such data, for example:
i.
Data on population subgroups are essential in analysing national sociodemographic characteristics; and
ii.
Statistics on ethnic origin constitute a framework for demographic analysis
and social studies.
21.
The United States Government for instance has collected data on race and
ethnicity since its first census of population in 1790 (Evinger, 1995). The data have been
used to study changes in social demographic, health, and economic characteristics of
various groups of people. The data from censuses, surveys and administrative records
have provided a historical record of the population diversity and its changing attitudes
and policy concerns about the identified population groups.
3.3. Limitations of ethnic data
22.
The major limitation in comparing data on nation and/or ethnic groups, at
international level, is the variability between different countries in collection of data on
the subject. Even in relation to the usage of the term “race” the definition and amount of
detail used to identify race may differ significantly among countries.
23.
Another constraint is that in most cases the data are unreliable. For example, selfidentification with a certain ethnic group may be clear and well defined in some cases,
such as indigenous groups that have existed for many generations. Alternatively in other
cases the respondent may feel that he/she does not fit in one group or might identify with
more than one ethnic group, all of which may lead to confusion. Measurement error is
another source of unreliability of data on ethnicity. In censuses it matters whether:
i.
The response is provided by a family member or is inferred by the
interviewer.
ii.
Legal rights or acquired benefits are perceived. This may cause, in some
cases, response bias in studies.
iii.
In some countries changes occur in ethnic identification.
iv.
There is undercoverage in the censuses.
24.
It has been reported for instance, in the Untied States of America that people
identify with more than one race or ethnic group. Evinger (1996) noted that, for example,
people with one Hispanic parent and one non-Hispanic parent may say yes to a separate
Hispanic-origin question but may not state that Hispanic in their sole identification.
3.4. Coverage of ethnicity data in the Demographic Yearbook system
25.
Table 1 uses the information obtained from the Demographic Yearbooks to show
the number of countries that reported on “national and/or ethnic groups” for each census
round and by continent. Countries that held more than one census in a given round have
been counted only once. Due to changes in geographical boundaries, these numbers
cannot be compared from one census round to another.
26.
In all of the above-mentioned issues of the Demographic Yearbook, most
countries reported the statistics on “National and/or ethnic group” by sex. However, in
each census round there was a small group of countries for which a breakdown by sex
was not available.
27.
In addition, starting from the 1971 Demographic Yearbook, a new classification
with an urban/rural variable was included. The following are the countries or areas that
reported on “National and/or ethnic group” by sex and by urban/rural areas: Guatemala,
South Africa and Southern Rhodesia (in the 1971 Demographic Yearbook); United
States, Australia, and Macao (in the 1973 Demographic Yearbook); Sri Lanka (in the
1979 Demographic Yearbook); and Belize and Romania (in the 1993 Demographic
Yearbook). In 1983 and 1988, there were no countries that included an urban/rural
classification.
Table 1: Coverage of ‘National and/or ethnic group” in the Demographic Yearbooks
Census round
America, America,
Asia
North
South
(N)
(N)
(N)
DYB
Africa
(N)
Europe Oceania
(N)
(N)
Total
(N)
1956
23
18
3
13
2
15
74
44
20
2
10
6
18
100
17
12
1
10
7
17
64
10
19
2
10
9
16
66
6
5
1
7
5
5
29
1950
(1945-1954)
1960
(1955-1964)
1970
(1965-1974)
1980
(1975-1984)
1990
(1985-1994)
1971,
1964,
1963
1988,
1979,
1973,
1971
1988,
1983,
1979
1993,
1988
(N): number of countries that reported information on “National and/or ethnic groups”
IV.
National data collection practices in the 2000 round of censuses
28.
In order to explore in more detail some of the conceptual and methodological
issues surrounding the concept of ethnicity its implicit reference indigenous peoples, we
refer to a review of national data collection practices from the 2000 round of censuses
(Alemenay and Zewoldi, 2003). A classification – based on the different question formats
and concepts used in the censuses – was derived from the information provided in the
census questionnaires.
4.1. Countries and Areas included in the study
29.
The 2000 round of censuses covers the period from 1995 to 2004. The findings
reported in this paper are based on the analysis of census questionnaires from 147
countries or areas, which represent 79 percent of the countries that have already
conducted a census during the 2000 round. From the 228 countries or areas recognized by
the United Nations, 81 were excluded from this analysis. The reasons for their exclusion
are as follows: twenty three have not taken or planned a census for the 2000 round (nine
of them have population registers instead), nineteen are expected to have a census in the
future, and 39 have supposedly completed a census but the questionnaires were not
available at the time of compiling the figures. Table 2 below shows the number of
countries or areas that were included and those that were excluded by continent.
30.
The coverage rates, defined here as the percentage of countries that were
included in the analysis from the total number of countries that completed a census (that
is excluding the category of non-available countries), are the following: 17 out of 39
countries (44 per cent) in Africa; 30 out of 34 (88 per cent) in North America; 11 out of
13 (85 per cent) in South America; 34 out of 39 (87 per cent) in Asia; 36 out of 37 (97
per cent) in Europe; and 19 out of 24 (79 per cent) in Oceania. Overall, this study
comprises 79 per cent of the countries that have conducted a census in the 2000 round.
Table 2: Countries And Areas covered
Africa
N
%
America, America,
Asia
North
South
N %
N
% N %
Europe Oceania
N
%
N
%
Total
N
%
Questionnaires included
17 30.5% 30 81% 11 79% 34 71% 36 75% 19 76% 147 64%
Missing Questionnaires*
22 39% 4 11%
Non-available Questionnaires** 17 30.5% 3
TOTAL
8%
2
14% 5 10% 1 2% 5 20% 39 17%
1
7% 9 19% 11 23% 1 4% 42 18%
56 100% 37 100% 14 100% 48 100% 48 100% 25 100% 228 100%
* “Missing questionnaires” refer to those countries that completed a census but for which
questionnaires were not available
** “Non-available questionnaires” refer to those countries in which no census has been
taken or planned or in which a census is expected to be taken at a future date, and
therefore a questionnaire was not available.
4.2. Coverage of ethnicity in the 2000 round of censuses
31.
From the 147 countries or areas included in our analysis, 95 countries (65 per
cent) asked one or more questions on ‘Ethnicity’. Table 3 shows the distribution of
countries by continent.
Table 3: Coverage in the 2000 round of censuses of "national and/or ethnic group"
Countries that
included 'National
and/or ethnic group'
Number of Number of
Countries that did
countries countries
NOT include
included in
that
'National and/or
the
conducted a
ethnic group'
analysis
census
N
%
N
N
N
%
Africa
7
41%
10
59%
17
39
America, North
America, South
23
9
77%
82%
7
2
23%
18%
30
11
34
13
Asia
22
65%
12
35%
34
39
Europe
19
53%
17
47%
36
37
Oceania
15
79%
4
21%
19
24
Total
95
65%
52
35%
147
186
32.
As shown in table 3, South America is the continent with a higher proportion of
countries including a question on ethnicity, closely followed by Oceania and North
America. Asia and Europe had lower proportions, although still more than half of the
countries included an ethnicity question. Finally, 7 out of the 17 African countries asked
about ethnic groups in their censuses. Please note again that due to the low number of
African countries included in the study (44 per cent of those that conducted a census),
these percentages may not give an accurate idea of the reality and therefore cannot be
generalized to the whole continent.
4.3. Concepts and terminology used in censuses
33.
As previously mentioned, the criteria for defining ethnicity usually differ
significantly from one country to another and from one point in time to another and may
be based on factors such as: colour, race, ethnic nationality, language, religion, customs,
tribes, etc. This heterogeneity is clearly reflected in the terminology used in the 2000
round of censuses.
34.
For classification purposes, all questions used in the 2000 round of censuses were
combined into 6 different categories: “ethnic group”, “ancestry or ethnic origin”; “race”;
“nationality”; “indigenous or aboriginal groups”; and “tribes” and/or “castes”. However,
the delineation between categories is not always well defined and in some cases census’
questionnaires included combinations of two or more of these groupings. The
classification shown in table 4 is based on terminology used in the questions and not the
concepts in which the output categories are based. However, comments on the
discrepancies between the terminology and the underlying concepts are included in this
section. Table 4 shows the detailed distribution of countries by terminology and
continent.
Table 4: Terminology used in the census questionnaires by number of countries
Africa
N %
-- Question on
'Ethnic group'
-- Questions on
'Ancestry' or ethnic
origin'
-- Question on 'Race'
-- Question on
'Nationality'
-- Question on
'Indigenous/aboriginal
groups'
-- Question on
'Tribes' and/or 'Castes'
America, America,
North
South
N
%
Asia
Oceania
N
N
%
N
6 86% 16 70% 3
-
12 55% 7 37% 7 47% 51 54%
-
-
3
-
1 -
-
-
6 26% 1 11% -
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
4
-
6 67% -
-
-
-
2
-
12 12%
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
4
-
-
-
-
%
-
N
7
%
-
-
3
-
-
4 27% 11 12%
7 32% 12 54% 1
2
%
Total
N
-
%
Europe
7%
7% 21 22%
-
%: Column percentages are calculated within a given continent. In some cases, they do
not add up to a 100% because some countries included more than one question on
ethnicity.
Ethnic group
35.
As table 4 shows, slightly more than half of the countries for which a
questionnaire was available included a question with the term “ethnic group”. In most
cases, the question format was “To what ethnic group does (the person) belong to?”
Although the terminology used in the question format was apparently the same for all
these countries or areas, the response categories referred to a variety of concepts such as
race, nationality, indigenous groups or a combination of two or more of those. In Africa,
3 out of the 6 countries that asked about “ethnic group” included answer categories that
referred to race2. In the case of Zambia and Senegal, “locals” had to enter their ethnic
group and foreigners had to mark a major racial group (in Zambia) or their nationality (in
Senegal). In North America, Costa Rica and Trinidad and Tobago included a question on
“ethnic group” with response categories that reflected a racial classification. The same
was true for the United Kingdom. Jersey (Channel Islands) and Guyana combined race
and nationality in their response categories.
36.
Both in North and South America, the indigenous component was included for
some countries in their response categories. Belize, Peru and Suriname are three countries
that used a combination of racial and indigenous categories in their response boxes to the
“ethnic group” question. Honduras and Guatemala used the term “ethnic group” to ask
for affiliation to indigenous groups. Although these countries were grouped under the
“ethnic group” category, they will be discussed together with the rest of countries that
included a question on indigenous or aboriginal groups.
37.
On the other hand, countries that integrated two or more terms (one of them
being “ethnic group”) in their question format were also grouped under this category.
Examples are Antigua and Barbuda, British Virgin Islands, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and
Nevis, and Saint Lucia, all of which asked, “To what ethnic, racial or national group do
you think you belong to?” and combined the three concepts in their output categories.
38.
Finally, Malaysia and Singapore are also two special cases in which language
was the principal criteria used in determining the respondent’s ethnic group. This linkage
between language and ethnicity becomes very clear in the way the question is asked: “To
what ethnic/dialect group does (the person) belong to?”
Ancestor and/or ethnic origin
39.
“Ancestry” is another concept used to measure the ethnic composition of a
population. As Aspinall (2001: 831) argues, “ancestry or ethnic origin” somewhat differs
from “ethnic group” in the sense that it is an “externally allocated” concept of identity
which “focuses the question back in time and conveys an historical and frequently
geographic context”, whereas “ethnic group” is a “self-perceived conception of social
group membership”. He then suggests that “ancestry” is a more stable concept that
produces lower gross rates whereas self-identified “ethnic group” often yields to higher
confusion and more inconsistent reporting.
40.
It is precisely to minimize confusion and ensure high quality data, that the
Australian Bureau of Statistics included a question using the concept of “Ancestry”. In it
was argued that “ancestry” had been chosen over other measures because the goal of such
question was to identify the respondents’ origin rather than a subjective perception of
their ethnic background (Edwards, 2003). In the 2000 round of censuses, Canada,
Kiribati, Niue, Puerto Rico, and the United States were the other countries that asked a
question using the term “ancestry” and/or “ethnic origin”. The Special Administrative
Region of Macao, which asked a question on the ethnicity of the respondent’s parents,
was also included under the “ethnic origin” category.
Race
41.
As discussed in the section on ethnic groups, at least 18 countries included a
question on “ethnic group” with answer categories referring to race or a combination
between race and other concepts. In addition, 11 out of the 95 countries that included a
question on ethnicity in their census used the term “race” in the formulation of the
question itself. These countries were: Anguilla, Canada, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, United
States and the US Virgin Islands (in North America); Brazil (in South America); and,
American Samoa, Guam, Federated States of Micronesia, and Northern Mariana Islands
(in Oceania). These last four countries included a question and response categories
combining the concepts of “race” and “ethnic origin”.
42.
The use of a racial classification in censuses to identify ethnic groups is a
controversial issue currently being debated in some countries. It has been argued that
racial categories carry strong connotations from colonial times and do not take into
account the heterogeneity within each group (Aspinall, 2001). However, it also has
important advantages when identifying those groups that have been historically excluded
and marginalized, groups that may be less easy to identify through self-reported openended ethnicity categories (Aspinall, 2001).
Nationality
43.
Another major concept used in the 2000 round of censuses to identify the ethnic
composition of a population was ethnic “nationality” (different from legal nationality or
country of citizenship). As table 4 indicates, 19 of the 21 countries that asked a question
on ethnic “nationality” are to be found in Asia and Europe. In Europe, with the exception
of Malta, the countries that asked a question on “nationality” were Eastern European
countries, and 5 of them are former Soviet Union Republics. In Asia, the 7 countries that
included a question on ethnic “nationality” were all from the Commonwealth of
Independent States. Nauru (in Oceania) and Aruba (in North America) also ask a question
on “nationality”. In Africa, although grouped under another category, Zambia and Kenya
also asked a question on the foreigners’ nationality.
Aboriginal or Indigenous Groups
44.
There has been a growing interest to include a question on indigenous groups in
population censuses. Not only is the information relevant for economic, social and health
policies, but it has also been used as a tool for indigenous communities to become more
visible and to reinforce their identities.
45.
Our classification identifies countries that have a specific separate question on
indigenous identities. Therefore, it does not include under the “indigenous groups”
category those countries (i.e. Puerto Rico, Saint Lucia, United States) that ask general
questions on ethnicity or race and include an output category for indigenous people. As
table 4 shows, the inclusion of a specific indigenous question is common mainly in Latin
American countries and in Oceania. In North America Canada, Honduras, Guatemala,
Mexico, and Panama included a specific question on indigenous groups. In South
America Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Suriname and Venezuela also included a
question in their censuses. Peru, which is not included in the table as belonging to this
group, had a question on “ethnic group” with output responses that mixed racial and
indigenous categories. Finally, in Oceania, New Zealand had a question on Maori
descendants and Australia asked a question on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
origin.
Tribes and/or castes
46.
The knowledge of tribal characteristics, as noted in the 1983’s Demographic
Yearbook technical notes, is “essential to any study of economic and social development
in societies where tribal population is important”. The classification in table 4 does not
reflect the measurement of such characteristics. Most African census questionnaires that
may have asked about tribal characteristics (i.e. Ghana, Senegal, and Zambia) had openended questions on “ethnic group”. Therefore, the lack of accessibility to the
enumerator’s manual and to the list of response categories does not shed light to whether
the responses were measuring tribal affiliation or some other concept such as race. In
Africa, only Kenya included a specific question with the term “tribe” in it. Nauru (in
Oceania) and India (in Asia) also included a question on “tribes”. As for “castes”, India
and Nepal were the only two countries that included a question in their censuses.
4.4. Question format
47.
So far, we have explored the conceptual and terminology issues used in the
measurement of ethnicity in censuses. This section will analyze the different formats of
response categories and its methodological implications.
48.
The level of detail and the typology of response categories differ from country to
country. Racial classifications, for example, tend to imply fewer groupings (6 or 7 on
average) than nationality3. Even when the concepts and terminology used is apparently
the same; countries may utilize some groupings and categories that others may not. All
this variation tends to limit international comparability of data from censuses.
49.
The level of detail and consistency of responses also depends on the structure of
the question itself. In this study, we have elaborated another classification that divides
countries into five different groupings, based on the question format: open-ended
question, question with response categories that do not include an open-ended “Other”
box, question with response categories with the option of specifying what “Other” is, a
Yes/No question, and finally an “unknown” type of answer for those countries for which
the full questionnaire or the code book for possible answers was not available. Overall,
95 countries asked 107 questions on ethnicity. Forty-six out of the 107 questions (43 per
cent) had pre-established response categories with an empty “Other” box (to be filled in
by the respondent when appropriate). Twenty-one questions (20 per cent) had preestablished categories without an open-ended “Other” category. Twenty-three out of the
107 (21 per cent) were open-ended questions, four (4 per cent) were a yes/no question,
and 13 questions (12 per cent) did not offer enough information on answer typology.
50.
Another factor that may affect the accuracy of responses is the selection of
answer categories or examples. An “example” effect takes place when the inclusion or
exclusion of one of the example categories generates wide differences in the reporting. In
1993, the Canadian census included a “Canadian” category as an example in the ancestry
question, resulting in an increase of self-reported Canadians from 763,000 to 5,193,000
(Aspinall, 2001). Therefore, the selection of response categories or examples has to be
carefully selected in order to ensure an accurate reporting of ethnicity data. In addition,
when the examples included in a question or the response categories change, data users
should be careful when comparing data from one census to another.
4.5. Multiple ethnic identities
51.
Migratory movements and intermarriage are two social phenomena that have
increased the difficulty of measuring ethnicity. As a consequence of these demographic
trends, multiple identities have increased, as well as the likelihood of reporting them,
adding to the complexity of ethnic data (Waters, 2000). In the 2000 round of censuses,
only 11 countries from the 95 that included a question on ethnicity allowed the option of
selecting multiple ethnic identities.
52.
In North America, Canada, the United States and the US Virgin Islands, for
example, included the option of multiple entries. In the Canadian census respondents
could mark as many identities as applicable both in the ancestry and race question. The
United States and US Virgin Islands, which have a common question on race, also
allowed for more than one categorisation. In addition, in the case of the United States an
open-ended ancestry question provided the possibility of filling in one or two answers. In
Oceania, seven countries allowed for multiple ethnic identities in the following questions:
ethnic origin or race (in American Samoa, Guam, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Northern
Mariana Islands and Tokelau) and ancestry (in Australia). In Europe, only Hungary
offered the option of selecting up to three ethnic nationalities. Responding to the demands
of several minority representatives, the 2001 Hungarian census was the first to include
the possibility of giving multiple answers on ethnicity.
53.
As the demand for multiethnic identities become more common, there will be a
growing need to adapt the census questions so that such phenomena is reflected in the
results. For instance, the Russian Federation is facing increasing demands to include
multiple ethnic identities in the 2012 census that would recognize ethnicities such as
Russian Jews or Tatar-Russians that are currently not reflected in the census results
(Tishkov, 2001).
V.
Conclusions
54.
The collection of data on indigenous people still represents a challenge due to
definitional problems in identifying the indigenous group and the heterogeneity of
concepts and terminology used by different countries. Notwithstanding the above
mentioned constraints, the demand for statistics in disaggregated forms is on the
increase. In order to realistically meet this demand the following actions may be useful:
i.
Standardize concepts and classifications pertaining to indigenous issues so
that they are statistically operational and a basis for collecting reliable and
valid data.
ii.
Maximise the use of different sources of data on indigenous people, namely,
censuses, surveys and administrative record systems.
iii.
Efforts should be made to disaggregate data on indigenous people by sex
and other sub-group classifications of the populations.
References
Alemany, J and Zewoldi, Y. (2003). Ethnicity: Data Collection and Dissemination.
Paper prepared for the United Nations Statistics Division.
Aspinall, P. (2000). Operationalising the collection of ethnicity data in studies of
the sociology of health and illness, Sociology of Health & Illness, 2000, 23, 6, 829-862.
Edwards, R. W. (2003). ABS Views on Content and Procedures. Australian Bureau
of Statistics, Canberra, Australia, July 2003.
Evinger, S. (1995). How Shall We Measure Our Nation’s Diversity? Black, White,
Cape Verdean, German-American, Or? Washington reviews how to define the population
for the 2000 census. Springer-Verlag, New York. Inc. pp.1-18
_________ (1996). How to Record. America Demographics, May 1996, pp.36-41.
Hungarian Central Statistical Office. (2002). Population Census 2001: Ethnic
affiliation. Prepared by the Population Census Department from the Hungarian Central
Statistical Office, 2002.
Tishkov, V. (2001) Ethnicity and Language in Russia’s 2002 Census. Paper
presented in the International Symposium “Population Census – XXIst Century:
Experience – Problems – Prospects”, Moscow, Russian Federation, 27-28 November
2001.
United Nations (1956) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New
York.
(1963) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1964) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1971) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1973) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1979) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1983) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1988) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1993) Demographic Yearbook. United Nations Publication, New York.
(1998). Principles and recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses.
Statistical Papers, No.67, Sales No E.98.XVII.8.
(2002). Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Report on first session (13-24 May
2002), E/CN.19/2002/1/ Rev.1
Waters, M. (2000) Immigration, Intermarriage, and the Challenges of Measuring
Racial/Ethnic Identities, American Journal of Public Health, November 2000, 90, 11, pp.
173-175.
1
The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not imply the expression of any opinion
on the part of the United Nations Secretariat.
2
These countries were: Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. Please note that they are all part of
SADC (South African Development Community) and have agreed to ask similar questions in their census.
3
The Russian Federation, for example, recognized as many as 191 nationalities