Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of boxes
- List of contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- 1 Defining hard-to-survey populations
- 2 Hard-to-survey populations in comparative perspective
- 3 Measuring undercounts for hard-to-survey groups
- 4 Counting and estimating hard-to-survey populations in the 2011 Census
- 5 A review of quality issues associated with studying hard-to-survey populations
- Part II Conducting surveys in difficult settings
- Part III Conducting surveys with special populations
- Part IV Sampling strategies for the hard to survey
- Part V Data collection strategies for the hard to survey
- Index
- References
3 - Measuring undercounts for hard-to-survey groups
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of boxes
- List of contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- 1 Defining hard-to-survey populations
- 2 Hard-to-survey populations in comparative perspective
- 3 Measuring undercounts for hard-to-survey groups
- 4 Counting and estimating hard-to-survey populations in the 2011 Census
- 5 A review of quality issues associated with studying hard-to-survey populations
- Part II Conducting surveys in difficult settings
- Part III Conducting surveys with special populations
- Part IV Sampling strategies for the hard to survey
- Part V Data collection strategies for the hard to survey
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Measuring census undercount is an important way of gaining insight about subpopulations that are hard to survey. Although such groups may be a relatively small proportion of the population, they contribute disproportionately to the overall undercount. Several methods are available for measuring census undercounts, so countries are able to choose the one that best suits their situation. The methods for estimating net undercount include post-enumeration surveys, demographic analysis, administrative record matches, and reverse record checks. Countries use these methods to make population estimates that are thought to be more accurate than the census; this estimate is then compared to the census count to give an estimate of the net undercount.
The methods have different data requirements, so not every country has the data needed to apply each one. Even when such data exist, some countries have privacy and confidentiality restrictions on how the data are used. Therefore, not all methods can be applied in all countries. Demographic analysis uses vital records in aggregate calculations. Administrative record matches and reverse record checks require high-quality records systems and laws that permit their use to measure undercounts. A post-enumeration survey is a second enumeration implemented on a sample basis after a census and then matched to the census on a case-by-case basis. One advantage of a post-enumeration survey is that is does not depend on the availability of an administrative or vital records system. Even if such records are available, their quality and the characteristics of individuals that they contain are not issues when a post-enumeration survey is done. Therefore, the method may be applied in developed or developing countries.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Hard-to-Survey Populations , pp. 37 - 57Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
(2009). 2011 UK Census coverage assessment and adjustment methodology. Population Trends, 137, 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. (2012). 2011 Census of Population and Housing – Details of Undercount. Report 2940.0. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
, & (2003). Coverage error in population censuses: The case of Turkey. Survey Methodology, 29(2), 155–65.Google Scholar
(1993). Using information from demographic analysis in post-enumeration survey estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(3), 1106–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1996). Demographic data analysis in less developed countries: 1946–1996. Population Studies, 50(3), 451–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1949). On a method of estimating birth and death rates and the extent of registration. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 44(1), 101–15.Google Scholar
, & (1983). Census experimental match studies. In Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section (pp. 173–76). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
(1955). The population of the United States in 1950 classified by age, sex, and color – a revision of census figures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50(1), 16–54.Google Scholar
(1986). CPS-Census Retrospective Study. Statistical Methods and Survey Methodology Research Report RR86-13. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
, , , & (1988). The Coverage of the Population in the 1980 Census. Evaluation and Research Report PHC80-E4. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
(2013). 2011 Census: 80.2 million inhabitants lived in Germany on 9 May 2011. Press release 188/2013-05-31, Weisbaden, Germany: German Federal Statistics Office.Google Scholar
, & (1999). GIS and register-based population census. In (ed.), Statistics, Registries, and Science (pp. 55–72). Helsinki: Statistics Finland.Google Scholar
, , & (1939). Comparison of birth tests by several methods in Georgia and Maryland. Vital Statistics – Special Reports, 7(60), 245–49.Google Scholar
(2012). Input data quality in register based statistics – the Norwegian experience. In Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings (pp. 1473–80). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
(1993). The 1990 Post-Enumeration Survey: operations and results. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 29(3), 1047–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2003). Accuracy and coverage evaluation: theory and design. Survey Methodology, 29(2), 129–38.Google Scholar
(2000). The Statistical Administrative Records System: System Design, Successes, and Challenges. Paper presented at the NISS/Telcordia Data Quality Conference, Morristown, NJ, November, 2000.
, & (2012). Components of Census Coverage for the Household Population in the United States. DSSD 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Memorandum Series #2010-G-04. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
(1998). Alternate Methodologies in the Evaluation of Census Coverage: Canada, the United States, Britain and Australia. Catalogue number 91F0015MPF-Number 005. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
(2012). Adjustment for Correlation Bias. DSSD 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Memorandum Series #2010-G-11. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
, , & (2002). Methods for conducting an administrative records experiment in Census 2000. In Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section (pp. 2709–13). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
, , & (2003). Setting the standard for comparison: census accuracy from 1940 to 2000. In 2003 Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings (pp. 2515–24). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
, & (1966). Evaluation of coverage in the 1960 Census of Population through case-by-case checking. In Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings, Social Statistics Section (pp. 62–70). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
(2012). Summary of Estimates of Coverage for Persons in the United States. DSSD 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Memorandum Series #2010-G-01. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
(2007). Summary of accuracy and coverage evaluation for Census 2000. Journal of Official Statistics, 23(3), 345–70.Google Scholar
(2011). Post-enumeration survey. In , , & (eds.), Encyclopedia of U. S. Census (2nd edn.): From the Constitution to the American Community Survey (pp. 339–43). Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
, , , , & (2006). Evaluation of census duplication using administrative records. Journal of Official Statistics, 22(4), 655–79.Google Scholar
, & (2008). Fundamental Issues with Reverse Record Check Methodology for Census Coverage Evaluation in the U.S. DSSD 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Memorandum Series #A-30. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
, & (2010). Overview of the 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Program and its evaluations. Chance, 46(3), 46–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1989). The forward trace study. In Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section (pp. 675–80). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
, and (1991). Total error in PES estimates of population. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 86(4), 839–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Census by questionnaire – census by registers and administrative records: the Finnish experience. Journal of Official Statistics, 7(4), 457–74.Google Scholar
(2012). Net Coverage Comparison with Post-Stratification. DSSD 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Memorandum Series #2010-G-12. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
(1947). A check on underenumeration in the 1940 Census. American Sociological Review, 12(1), 44–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (2012). 2010 Census Match Study. 2010 Census Planning Memoranda Series, Report No. 247. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
(1986). Which countries will follow the Scandinavian lead in taking a register-based census?Journal of Official Statistics, 2(4), 415–24.Google ScholarPubMed
(2001). ESCAP II: Demographic Analysis Results. Executive Steering Committee for ACE Policy II, Report No. 1. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
, , , & (1993). Estimation of population coverage in the 1990 United States Census based on demographic analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(3), 1061–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1992). Incorporating estimates of census coverage error into the Canadian Population Estimates Program. In Proceedings of the 1992 Annual Research Conference (pp. 18–26). Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
, & (1966). An evaluation of coverage in the 1960 census of population by techniques of demographic analysis and by composite methods. In Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section (pp. 71–85). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
(2004). Use of Registers and Administrative Data Sources for Statistical Purposes – Best Practices in Statistics Finland. Helsinki: Statistics Finland.Google Scholar
(1997). Using administrative records persons in the 1996 Community Census Test. In Proceedings of American Statistical Association, Survey Research Methods Section (pp. 416–21). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
(1931). Reprinted from Dominion of Canada, Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Seventh Census of Canada, 1931 (vol. II), Census Monograph No. 3. Ottawa, Ontario: Cloutier.
. (2012). The 2011 Population and Housing Census of Turkey. Working Paper 18. UNECE-Eurostat Expert Group Meeting on Censuses Using Registers, Geneva, 22–23 May 2012. Geneva: UN Economic Commission for Europe.Google Scholar
. (1964). Record Check Studies of Population Coverage. Series ER 60, No.2. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
. (1974). Estimates of Coverage of Population by Sex, Race, and Age: Demographic Analysis. Census Population and Housing: 1970 Evaluation and Research Program, PHC(E)-4. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
. (1960). The Post-Enumeration Survey: 1950. Technical Paper No. 4. US Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
. (2010). The Development and Sensitivity Analysis of the 2010 Demographic Analysis Estimates. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
. (2012). Documentation for the Revised 2010 Demographic Analysis Middle Series Estimates. Washington, DC: author.Google Scholar
. (2006). Conference of European Statisticians Recommendations for the 2010 Censuses of Housing and Population. Report ECE/CES/STAT/NONE/2006/4. Geneva:Author.Google Scholar
. (2010). Report of the Joint UNECE/Eurostat Expert Group Meeting on Register-Based Censuses (The Hague, The Netherlands, 10–11 May 2010). Report ECE/CES/2010/49. Geneva: Author.Google Scholar
. (2012). Report of the Joint UNECE/Eurostat Expert Group Meeting on Register-Based Censuses (Geneva, Switzerland, 22–23 May 2012). Geneva: Author.Google Scholar
. (2009). Final Report of the United Nations Regional Workshop on the 2010 World Programme on Population and Housing Censuses: Census Evaluation and Post-Enumeration Surveys (Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 14–18 September 2009). New York: Author.Google Scholar
. (2010b). United Nations Regional Workshop on the 2010 World Programme on Population and Housing Censuses: Census Evaluation and Post-Enumeration Surveys (Bangkok, Thailand, 10–14 May 2010). New York: Author.Google Scholar
(2010). Census taking in Europe: how are populations counted in 2010?Population & Societies, 457. Paris: Institut National d’Études Démographiques.Google Scholar
, & (2001). Post-Enumeration Surveys: Are They Worth It? ESA/STAT/AC.84/13. New York: United Nations Secretariat.Google Scholar
- 6
- Cited by