On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Ray Thomas wrote:
> The ONC idea in the UK started with the aftermath of the 1991 census. The
> original count clearly underestimated the population.
Is the initial count based on enumerators' field books rather than
household returns? As such, it would be a good estimator of number of
households (= number of forms handed out) but a less reliable estimate of
the population count.
> The method of the ONC is to support the census count with a follow up survey
> to estimate under-enumeration. Quite unobjectionable. But in the UK the
> result was to give all attention to the method of estimation. So we got a
> lower census response rate than ever before
The "so" is questionnable. The postal return of forms was an experiment,
and I would guess contributed more to an undercount than did the intention
to get "one number" and stick with it. This view is, obviously,
provisional and may be revised.
R. Allan Reese Email: [log in to unmask]
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
|