Part 1 - B: Global recommendations – content and classifications Rationale for development of

1. 2020 World Round of Population and Housing Censuses – Pacific Island countries’ census planning meeting International recommendations/standards, contemporary technologies and regional cooperation Noumea, New Caledonia, 27 July – 31 July 2015 Part 1 - B: Global recommendations – content and classifications Rationale for development of Pacific core set of census questions

2. Structure of presentation • Rationale for development of Pacific core set of census questions • Illustration of importance of common core set of questions – achieve comparability of statistics between countries/ across the region – Example Labor force questions (FSM, HIES 2014) • Reflections on TA efficiency • Achieve improved census outcomes

3. 1. Rationale for development • Political mandate (Pacific Plan 2005)/ Policy relevance • Harmonization of statistical classifications/systems • Provide comparable date across 15 Pacific island countries • Improve quality of census products • Improved credibility and comparability of Pacific island statistics • Improve efficiency in TA support • Substantial increase in TA support between 1990, 2000 and 2010 rounds of Pacific Island censuses

4. 1. Rationale for development Political mandate/policy relevance • Pacific Leaders made it clear: desire for greater use of common statistical systems and classifications, and a core set of data across sectors • Focus on core set implies data comparability (pointless otherwise to have something “in common”) • Data comparability implies standard census questions across common areas of interest (to capture basic demographic, economic, social statistics)

5. 1. Rationale for development Political mandate/policy relevance • 1st attempt at harmonization of census questions • 1998 Nadi meeting (with UNSD) – development of Pacific Model Census Questionnaire • Not a resounding success • 2nd attempt at harmonization of census questions • 2006 Nadi meeting (with UNFPA) • commitment to stick to a core set of census questions => not a common questionnaire to ensure countries can add additional questions for country-specific questions) • Uptake of commitment = not universal, but some takers • 1998: First attempt at harmonization • Nadi meeting 1998: development of 2006 Pacific Model Census Questionnaire regional census planning meeting

6. 1. Rationale for development Political mandate/policy relevance • 3rd attempt at harmonization of census questions • 2015 Noumea meeting = THIS WEEK • Provide you with one illustration of what will happen without common census questions regarding capture of basicdemographic, economic, social statistics: • reported unemployment rates across the region

7. 1. Rationale for development

8. 1. Rationale for development 15 countries – 15 quite different values • Enormous spread of values, at first sight looks implausible • What’s your take? • do you trust such a spread of values across the region? • are such discrepancies credible, and hence data truly comparable? • does this picture reflect true differences between countries, such as between vastly different economies? • what other options might explain this scenario?

9. 1. Rationale for development 15 countries – 4 different questions to measure economic activity • What was person’s main activityduring the past week (5)? 2. Did person undertake any workduring the past week (8)? 3. Did person work for pay/undertake business activitiesduring the past week (1)? 4. Main type of workundertaken during last week (1)?

10. 1. Rationale for development

11. 2. Design of common set of LF questions Key components • Common entry question: main activity last week • 13 main activity categories, grouped under 3 common headings: paid employment, unpaid employment , not in the labor force (including in the latter, a specific category of “doing nothing”) • Common definition of unemployment (3 questions): • Did person actively look for work? • Person not looking – asked why not? • Would person have been available for work? • Additional focus on secondary activity • Same suite of questions as those used for main activity –

12. 2. Design of common set of LF questions Key components (continued) • Unemployment questions asked of everyone • not in the labour force (standard ILO practice) • in unpaid employment, to be able to also capture unpaid workers looking for, and available for paid work • Rationale: • differentiate more accurately between bona fide subsistence farmers, and unpaid “family workers” helping out with every-day household chores, instead of assuming everyone engaged in these activities does this out of choice, cultural tradition, conviction, love for the job. • Provide more realistic context to actual employment conditions, and help disentangle the myth of low Pacific unemployment (and associated perceptions hardship, including poverty).

13. 2. Design of common set of LF questions Key components (continued) • Secondary activity questions asked of everyone in paid, unpaid employment, and everyone not in the labor force (except those proclaiming to “do nothing”) • Rationale: • Acknowledge the reality of people doing more than one job. • Being able to better differentiate between full-time students doing part-time work, and part-time workers being full/part-time students • Capture full-time housewives selling goods on the market, or having part-time paid, or unpaid job –

14. 2. Design of common set of LF questions First application of common set of LF questions • Republic of Marshall Islands mini Labor Force Survey (Sep 2012), • Pacific island Living Conditions survey (Vanuatu, Oct-Sep 2012/13) Incorporation into Pacific HIES methodology • in recent HIES in FSM, Nauru, Solomon islands and Palau • upcoming HIES in Tonga, Tuvalu and Cook Islands –

15. FSM Labour Force “models” Title

16. 3. Improve efficiency in TA support Improve efficiency in TA support • Substantial increase in TA support between 1990, 2000 and 2010 rounds of Pacific population and housing censuses: • Census planning • Census preparation (Cartography, listing, pilot, scanning, field staff training) • Managing census enumeration • Data processing • Data analysis and reporting • Dissemination • Impossible to maintain this level of support by following status quo • common core census questions/modules help with training (materials), data processing speed of turn around -> improve overall efficiency

24. 4. Improved census outcomes • The enormous amount of TA provided during 2010 round, largely because countries used different questions/census format-structure to capture essentially the same topics • This required different training modules, data processing formats, tabulation plans – delaying getting data out to users • More important: serious questions about data integrity-quality-comparability • Solution: common core set of standard census questions • improved data quality/comparability between countries • shorten time-lag of getting data to users (data processing speed, tabulation programs) • improved overall efficiency of TA support Thank you