Census 2011 KCP Steering Group presentation Tuesday 28th May, 2013 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Census 2011

KCP Steering Group presentation

Dominic Baker Research and Insight Officer Consultation and Partnerships Team Policy and Partnerships Unit

Tuesday 28th May, 2013

Census collects data on...

Ethnicity Religion Tenure Marital status Car or van availability Population count The labour market Main language spoken Proficiency in English Health Qualifications Household composition Country of birth Age structure

But not..... ...income OR crime

Other local or national datasets contain such data Composite indices bring datasets together – notably the Index of Multiple Deprivation

Examples of IMD data sources

• Income Support families
• Claimants of Incapacity Benefit
• Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio
• Proportion of young people not staying on in school
• Difficulty of access to owner-occupation
• Violence – number of reported violent crimes
• Social and private housing in poor condition
• Road distance to a GP surgery

How accurate is Census data?

Predicting areas of low response – The Hard to Count Index

Urban areas are the hardest to count, especially London, Birmingham and the northern conurbations In London the hardest to count areas were clustered in inner London

Hard to count even by London standards

95.1 per cent of the borough ranked in the hardest to count category compared to 12.6 per cent in London Kensington and Chelsea not quite as “hard to count” as Westminster!

Better data than last time

More thorough planning and additional resources meant response rate increased from 64 per cent to 82 per cent A higher response rate reduces the need for such “intelligent guesswork” Population figures for the borough, wards, and smaller areas, all include “intelligent guesses” about non-responders ONS “impute” the characteristics of the “missing” 18 per cent So the census is by no means 100% accurate but it is difficult to improve upon it

Has the population of the Royal Borough decreased since 2001?

Only 25 wards in London showed an intercensal population decrease 8 of these wards were in Kensington and Chelsea 7 of the 10 greatest decreases were in Kensington and Chelsea

Decrease in London by ward

Possible explanations

Approximate location of Kensington and Chelsea Short-term residents (broadly those staying for less than 6 months – some 3,800 people) are excluded More properties may be vacant e.g. because international property buyers. Our basis for comparison – the 2001 census – may simply be too inaccurate We may have fewer households (e.g. because of deconversions – though planning data suggests otherwise) There may be fewer people in each household There is no clear answer and further analysis is needed

Are there more empty homes?

Not directly comparable BUT does show an increase in the majority of wards

2,846 additional “empty” households*

*using datasets identified by the ONS as broadly comparable

2011 data - Households with no usual residents: There is a clear hotspot in central London Significant chunks of Brompton and Hans Town have more than one in five households are vacant

How has the age profile of the Royal Borough changed? 2001 2011

Little change in the broad age groups Population pyramids by 5 year age band show no striking demographic shift

Proportionally Kensington and Chelsea has:

• fewer residents aged less than 20
• more residents aged between 25-39

Compared to London and England and Wales

How diverse is the Royal Borough?

Kensington and Chelsea:

• The Simpson’s Diversity Index shows that Kensington

and Chelsea, much like the vast majority of London, has become more diverse between 2001 to 2011

• In 2011 Kensington and Chelsea is ranked the 19th

most diverse borough in England and Wales (out of 348) Simpson’s Diversity Index: This intercensal measure looks at the distribution

• f the population between 10 ethnic groups. If

the population falls into one group the ward is given a score of 1 if the population is split equally into 10 groups the ward is given a score of 10.

Simpson’s Diversity Index

A diverse population...

• Christian residents have decreased by 8% to 54 per cent.
• Muslim population has grown by 1.6 per cent to 10 per cent
• Those with no religion has increased by 5.3 per cent to 20.6 per cent
• 52 per cent of residents not born in the UK
• White group has decreased from 78.6 per cent to 70.6 per cent.
• The Asian/Asian British groups has increased by 5.1 per cent to 10 per cent
• In 21 per cent of households no residents speak English as their main language
• 61 per cent of residents have a UK passport
• Couples from 12 per cent of households are made up of more than one ethnicity
• 18 per cent of residents arrived in the UK in the five years preceding the Census
• 1,001 residents in a civil partnership
• 38 per cent of residents gave a non British national identity

78.6 4.1 4.9 7.0 5.5 70.6 5.7 10 6.6 7.2 59.8 5 18.4 13.3 3.4 85.9 2.2 7.5 3.4 1 White Mixed Asian/Asian British Black/Black British Other ethnic group RBKC 2001 RBKC 2011 London 2011 England and Wales 2011

Source: ONS

Ethnicity – focus on White British

Total % % change Ethnicity broad groups

15 10 5 5 10 15

0 to 15 16 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 49 50 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 85 and over Population (%)

Male Female

UK Born Born outside the UK

15 10 5 5 10 15

0 to 15 16 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 49 50 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 85 and over Population (%)

Male Female

Born in the UK

Per cent ‘other’ (i.e. non-UK) identities National identity

56.1% 57.6% 56.9% 75.5% 86.9% 71.5% 77.0% 36.8% 31.8% 79.3% 73.3% 61.0% 43.8% 61.3% 61.2% 71.3% 87.0% 67.4% 13.8% 75.6% 87.6% 93.5% 60.6% 6.0% 5.3% 5.6% 6.3% 1.9% 3.4% 3.3% 4.6% 3.6% 2.9% 4.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.4% 6.2% 3.9% 1.9% 4.8% 5.7% 1.7% 0.6% 2.3% 3.6% 37.9% 37.1% 37.5% 18.2% 11.2% 25.1% 19.7% 58.6% 64.6% 17.8% 22.7% 36.0% 52.2% 33.3% 32.5% 24.8% 11.1% 27.8% 80.6% 22.7% 11.8% 4.3% 35.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Other: Other Other: Arab OTHER TOTAL Black: Other Black Black: Caribbean Black: African BLACK TOTAL Asian: Other Asian Asian: Chinese Asian: Bangladeshi Asian: Pakistani Asian: Indian ASIAN TOTAL Mixed: Other Mixed Mixed: White and Asian Mixed: White and Black African Mixed: White and Black Caribbean MIXED TOTAL White: Other White White: Gypsy/Irish Traveller White: Irish White: UK WHITE TOTAL

OTHER WHITE NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT GROUP = 32,279 residents

63.9% 69.2% 71.8% 73.7% 73.9% 77.3% 78.0% 68.5% 55.9% 53.0% 47.2% 50.0% 57.5% 65.9% 71.0% 73.6% 76.8% 79.2% 81.0% 84.0% 85.4% 87.8% 36.1% 30.8% 28.2% 26.3% 26.1% 22.7% 22.0% 31.5% 44.1% 47.0% 52.8% 50.0% 42.5% 34.1% 29.0% 26.4% 23.2% 20.8% 19.0% 16.0% 14.6% 12.2%

All Ages 0 to 4 5 to 7 8 to 9 10 to 14 15 16 to 17 18 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85 and over

UK Identities Other

Ethnicity by national identity Age by national identity

UK/Irish Only Other identity and at least one UK identity Other Identity

Per cent households with no occupants speaking English as a main language Main language wordcloud

Proficiency in English

30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 3 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85 and over

Males RBKC Females RBKC Males GLA Females GLA

Speaks English well or very well

Christian change: 2001-2011 Muslim change: 2001-2011

Christian: 86,005 residents Male: 46.5% l Female: 53.5% No religion: 32,669 residents Male: 55.7% l Female: 44.3% Jewish: 3,320 residents Male: 52.9% l Female: 47.1% Buddhist: 2,447 residents Male: 42.9% l Female: 57.1% Hindu: 1,386 residents Male: 52.1% l Female: 47.9% Muslim: 15,812 residents Male: 50.8% l Female: 49.2%

8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8

0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+

Population (%) Male Female 8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8

0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 -19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+

Population (%) Male Female 8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8

0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+

Population (%) Male Female

8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8

0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+

Population (%) Male Female 8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8

0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 -19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+

Population (%) Male Female 8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8

0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 -19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85+

Population (%) Male Female

Religion: Population Pyramids

60.1% 60.4% 64.8% 54.6% 37.0% 54.5% 3.6% 3.5% 5.2% 5.3% 3.4% 3.1% 36.3% 36.1% 30.0% 40.0% 59.6% 42.4%

Christian No religion Muslim Jewish Buddhist Hindu

UK and Irish identities Other identity and a UK identity Other identity only

80.2% 76.5% 16.2% 91.5% 23.9% 3.6% 4.9% 7.1% 5.9% 3.0% 7.8% 3.2% 5.4% 10.7% 19.0% 64.4% 90.0% 6.9% 15.4% 43.5% 3.4%

Christian No religion Muslim Jewish Buddhist Hindu Other Black Asian Mixed White

Religion and National Identity Religion and Ethnicity

How healthy are our residents?

A self assessed health question was included because:

• a strong predictor of health service use
• research shows that when making a response people consider factors

such as their fitness, disability, mental health and visits to the doctor

• not perfect but standard practice for health researchers
• research shows that the accuracy is best for working age populations
• harmonised to the Eurostat model

In Kensington and Chelsea 57.8 per cent of residents reported that they were in very good health, ranked first in England and Wales.

Significant variation within the

• borough. In four wards more than 7%

report having ‘bad or very bad health’ and less than 50% reporting ‘very good health’. In two, more than 65% report being in ‘very good health’

Bad or very bad health Fair health Good health Very good health

Housing Tenure in 2011

Private rented Social rented Owner Occupied

Per cent private rented households for London boroughs Per cent private rented households for London boroughs Percentage point change by ward

How has the working population changed?

35.1 per cent of working residents work more than 49 hours per week, an increase of 1.8 per cent. 19.6 per cent of residents work less than 30 hours per week, an increase of 2.2 per cent. 45.3 per cent work 31 to 48 hours, a decrease of 4.1 per cent

Hours worked Occupation groups

Increase of 5.7 per cent (e.g. Civil engineers, IT specialist managers, medical practitioners, teachers) Decrease of 2.3 per cent (e.g. Sales administrators, finance officers, local government administrative

• fficers)

Decrease of 6.3 per cent (e.g. Chief Executives, financial managers, public health managers, marketing and sales directors)

The future of the census

• Census has run decennially since 1801, with a gap only in 1941
• Options
• A rolling census: 4-10 per cent sample of the population taking place

annually in different parts of the country

• Short Census questionnaire for all residents every 10 years and an

annual survey of a sample of the population

• Linkage options – combination of administrative data and coverage

surveys