DOCSLIB.ORG

New Zealanders' Cultural Participation in 2020 and Future Participation in A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Zealanders' Cultural Participation in 2020 and Future Participation in A New Zealanders’ cultural participation in 2020 and future participation in a post-COVID environment May 2021 Ngā mihi Acknowledgements Ehara taku toa i te toa takitahi, engari he toa takitini E hiahia ana te Manatū Taonga ki te mihi ki ngā ringa Manatū Taonga the Ministry for Culture and Heritage maha i āwhina ki te waihanga i tēnei rangahau. would like to thank the many hands that helped shape this research. I te tuatahi, ka mihi ake ki ngā kaiwhakauru ki te patapatai i tuku mai i te wā, me ō rātou wheakotanga ki a mātou. First of all, thank you to the survey participants who gave their time to share their experiences with us. Ngā mihi hoki ki a Colmar Brunton mō te tuku i tēnei mahi. Thank you to Colmar Brunton for delivering this work. Ngā mihi hoki ki ngā kaiarotake ā-roto me te kaiarotake ā- Thanks also to our internal reviewers and external waho a Te Amokura Consultants Ltd, nā rātou i whakarato reviewer Te Amokura Consultants Ltd who provided whakahokinga kōrero mō te hoahoatanga o te patapatai feedback on the survey design and report. me te pūrongo Colmar Brunton 2021 | 2 1 Background and method………………4 2 Key insights………………………………….9 3 Participation………………………………11 Contents 4 Online engagement……………………48 Encouraging people back to in- 5 person activities...........................58 6 Appendices……………………………….64 Colmar Brunton 2021 | 3 Background and method Background Population lockdowns, the New Zealand border closure and public gathering restrictions brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted New Zealanders’ arts, culture and heritage participation in 2020. The Ministry for Culture and Heritage commissioned Colmar Brunton to undertake research to better understand the changes that occurred as a result of the pandemic and to provide updated population data about cultural participation. The specific objectives of this research were to: • Determine current levels of participation and anticipated future participation. • Understand COVID-19 related concerns about participation and what can be done to alleviate these concerns. • Understand new participation behaviours brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic (for example, digital participation). Colmar Brunton 2021 | 5 Method SAMPLE METHOD WEIGHTING We conducted an online survey of 1,718 New Zealanders aged Online survey using Colmar Brunton’s consumer panel. The survey respondents have been weighted to ensure the 18 plus. During data quality checks we removed 270 sample profile is representative of all New Zealanders aged 18 respondents. These respondents had provided combinations of All interviews took place between the 21st of October 2020 and plus. Weights have been applied by age within gender, answers which were not realistic, or they hadn’t taken the 11th of November 2020. ethnicity, region and household income by household size. adequate time to complete the survey (i.e. they answered all survey questions in six minutes or less). After removing these Participants were given the option of completing the survey in The weighting corrects for the over-sampling of Māori, Pacific respondents, we were left with a sample size of 1,448. The English or te reo Māori. Although 31 people indicated that they peoples and Asian peoples. maximum margin of error on a sample of this size is +/-2.6%. wanted to do the survey in te reo, ultimately all participants completed the survey in English. We over-sampled Māori, Pacific peoples and Asian peoples to Online survey using Colmar Brunton’s The survey respondents have been weighted enable more detailed subgroup analysis for these groups. In addition to providing the option to completeconsumer the survey panel. in te to ensure the sample profile is reo Māori, the following steps were taken to ensure the representative of all New Zealanders aged 18 For more details on the sample composition please refer to research was carried outAll in interviews a culturally took responsive place between way: the 21st of plus. Weights have been applied by age Appendix B. th • Colmar Brunton used a MāoriOctober consultant and the to11 informof November. within gender, ethnicity, region and questionnaire design and to review the findings. household income by household size. • Colmar Brunton conducted cognitiveParticipants testing were with given Māori the andoption of Pacificcompleting participants. the survey in English or te reo The weighting corrects for the over-sampling • The Ministry engaged internalMāori. specialistsSome respondents and external indicated that of Māori, Pacific peoples and Asian peoples. expertise (Te Amokura Consultantsthey wanted Ltd.) to to do inform the survey question in te reo but design, quality assurance ofultimately the te reo all Māori participants questionnaire completed the and review of findings.survey in English. Colmar Brunton 2021 | 6 Notes to the reader Post-COVID 2020 participation and intended participation (next 12 months) Survey limitations Participation in post-COVID 2020 is based off the three months before the survey interview (e.g. 21st of July to 21st of October - see The intention-action gap following slide for more details). Intended participation (next 12 months) is based on respondents’ expectations on whether their Behavioural science has clearly identified a gap 2020 level of participation (over the last three months) will increase, reduce or stay the same over the next 12 months. between intention and action. This occurs when someone intends to do something (e.g. exercise) but doesn’t end up doing it. It’s important to Calculating intended participation (next 12 months) remember this when interpreting the results, as respondents could have overstated their We calculated intended participation by moving a respondent either At least once a day 1 +1 if respondent intentions, inflating intended participation. one point up or down the frequency of current attendance scale, intends to do activity depending on whether they said they would participate more or less. A few times a week 2 more often No change if Online survey FREQUENT respondent intends to A key limitation of doing an online survey was that If they said they would participate ‘about the same’ we kept their Once a week 3 participate ‘about the we couldn’t reach those without internet access. intended participation the same as their 2020 participation. If they same’ as in post-COVID Once every 2 weeks 4 2020 This means this research does not necessarily said they wouldn’t do the activity again in the next 12 months they -1 if respondent reflect what is happening for this group of people. were recoded as non-participants. If they hadn’t done the activity in REGULAR intends to do activity Once every 3 to 4 weeks 5 less often the last three months but would in the next 12 they were coded as less than once a month. IONAL Less often 6 OCCAS We then grouped the codes into four broader participation groups: Not at all 7 Significance testing frequent (at least once a week), regular (every 2-4 weeks), occasional All differences mentioned in the report are Don’t know 8 (less than once a month) and non-attenders. statistically significant at the 95% confidence level unless stated otherwise. Colmar Brunton 2021 | 7 Timeline for research The timeline below shows some contextual factors that are worth noting when interpreting the results. In the survey we asked participants to think back over the last three months and in all regions this would have covered a period when restrictions were in place. Public gathering restrictions first came into place on the 16th of March 2020, and the 12 August 21 September 23 September country moved to COVID Alert Level 4 on Auckland raised the 25th of March. At COVID Alert Level 4, to COVID Alert Rest of NZ moves down to Auckland moves down to COVID Alert Level 2 Level 3 due to COVID Alert Level 1. all public gatherings were banned and 21 July Auckland remains at 2.5 th community restrictions stayed in place until the 9 of All of New transmission, June 2020. In August 2020, new community Zealand at rest of NZ at 30 August cases of COVID-19 in the Auckland area saw COVID Alert COVID Alert 7 October Auckland return to COVID Alert Level 3 and Level 1 Level 2 Auckland steps down to the rest of New Zealand to COVID Alert COVID Alert Level 2.5 Auckland moves to COVID Alert Level 1 Level 2. At this point, all live in-person cultural events were cancelled in Auckland and were restricted elsewhere. On the 21st of September regions outside of Auckland moved back down to COVID Alert Level 1, 21 July - 11 August 21 October th and Auckland followed suit on the 7 of Respondents were asked to think back to Survey commences October. what cultural activities they did in the three months before they took the survey. The New Zealand border has been closed Respondents had a starting point for this 11 November since the 19th of March 2020. This closure three month period between 21 July and Survey ends has prevented international acts from 11 August (inclusive). touring New Zealand and created challenges for cultural activities relying on Research activities international resources. Colmar Brunton 2021 | 8 Key Insights Key Insights Encouraging people back to Participation Online engagement in-person activities The findings suggest that participation in arts, culture and There is a clear preference for in-person engagement with Provide reassurance that heritage activities will increase from where it was in post- arts, culture and heritage. tickets will be refunded if 71% COVID 2020. IN PERSON ONLINE more willing Women, Māori and an event is cancelled due to attend Intended participation is higher than post-COVID 2020 Pacific peoples to COVID-19. participation for all arts, culture and heritage activities. The particularly prefer increases are most pronounced for activities which involve 67% 12% in-person participation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RCS Demographics V2.0 Codebook
    Religious Characteristics of States Dataset Project Demographics, version 2.0 (RCS-Dem 2.0) CODE BOOK Davis Brown Non-Resident Fellow Baylor University Institute for Studies of Religion [email protected] Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following persons for their assistance, without which this project could not have been completed. First and foremost, my co-principal investigator, Patrick James. Among faculty and researchers, I thank Brian Bergstrom, Peter W. Brierley, Peter Crossing, Abe Gootzeit, Todd Johnson, Barry Sang, and Sanford Silverburg. I also thank the library staffs of the following institutions: Assembly of God Theological Seminary, Catawba College, Maryville University of St. Louis, St. Louis Community College System, St. Louis Public Library, University of Southern California, United States Air Force Academy, University of Virginia, and Washington University in St. Louis. Last but definitely not least, I thank the following research assistants: Nolan Anderson, Daniel Badock, Rebekah Bates, Matt Breda, Walker Brown, Marie Cormier, George Duarte, Dave Ebner, Eboni “Nola” Haynes, Thomas Herring, and Brian Knafou. - 1 - TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3 Citation 3 Updates 3 Territorial and Temporal Coverage 4 Regional Coverage 4 Religions Covered 4 Majority and Supermajority Religions 6 Table of Variables 7 Sources, Methods, and Documentation 22 Appendix A: Territorial Coverage by Country 26 Double-Counted Countries 61 Appendix B: Territorial Coverage by UN Region 62 Appendix C: Taxonomy of Religions 67 References 74 - 2 - Introduction The Religious Characteristics of States Dataset (RCS) was created to fulfill the unmet need for a dataset on the religious dimensions of countries of the world, with the state-year as the unit of observation.
    [Show full text]
  • Families and Whānau Status Report 2018
    Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit Families and Whānau Status Report Families 2018 Families and Whānau Status Report 2018 The Families Commission operates under the name Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit (Superu) Our purpose The purpose of the Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit (Superu) was to increase the use of evidence by people across the social sector so that they could make better decisions – about funding, policies and services – to improve the lives of New Zealanders and New Zealand’s communities, families and whānau. Due to Superu’s disestablishment on 1 July 2018, the families and whānau work programme is now managed by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). This report was prepared by MSD under delegation from Superu. Access to the data used in this report was provided by Statistics New Zealand under conditions designed to give effect to the security and confi dentiality provisions of the Statistics Act 1975. The results presented in this report are the work of the authors, not Statistics NZ. The results in the family wellbeing section of this report are not offi cial statistics. They have been created for research purposes from the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) managed by Statistics NZ. The opinions, fi ndings, recommendations and conclusions expressed in this report are those of the authors, not Statistics NZ. Access to the anonymised data used in this study was provided by Statistics NZ in accordance with security and confi dentiality provisions of the Statistics Act 1975. Only people authorised by the Statistics Act 1975 are allowed to see data about a particular person, household, business or organisation, and the results in this report have been confi dentialised to protect these groups from identifi cation.
    [Show full text]
  • Except Where Specific Reference Is Made in the Main Text of the Thesis
    FACULTY OF SCIENCE Te Wahanga Putaiao FACULTY OF ENGINEERING Te Wahanga Ahunui Pūkaha STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP Except where specific reference is made in the main text of the thesis, this thesis contains no material extracted in whole or in part from a thesis, dissertation or research paper presented by me for another degree or diploma. No other person’s work (published or unpublished) has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of the thesis. This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution. Full Name: Hamish Richmond Laurence Howard Signature: Date: 31/07/20 DO HUMAN VALUES PREDICT PERCEPTIONS, ATTITUDES & BEHAVIOURS TOWARDS THE NEW ZEALAND MARINE ENVIRONMENT? HAMISH R. L. HOWARD A thesis submitted to Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Science in Society) 2021 Whakataukī “He ika kai ake i raro, he rāpaki ake i raro” [As a fish nibbles from below, so an ascent begins from the bottom] —Mead & Grove, 2004, p. 73 i Abstract Human values predict perceptions, attitudes and behaviours towards the NZ marine environment. A confidential online survey (The New Zealand Marine Values Survey) was completed by 1,567 NZ citizens and residents in September and October of 2019. Respondents answered a variety of questions relating to demographic variables, PABs (perceptions, attitudes and behaviours) towards the NZ marine environment, and psychographic variables. Human values (values), as conceptualised and operationalised in the Theory of Basic Human Values by social psychologist and cross-cultural researcher Shalom H.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Engagement- Canterbury Wellbeing Index
    He Tohu Ora: Cultural engagement Downloaded from https://www.canterburywellbeing.org.nz/he-tohu-ora/#link-cultural-engagement on 30/09/2021 12:23 AM Cultural identity is strengthened when there is access to not only cultural heritage but also opportunities for cultural engagement, such as speaking te reo Māori or taking part in kapa haka [5]. Kapa haka, for example, has been identified as having strong links to culture and Māori identity, as well as providing a social, strengths-based environment for rangatahi (youth) [25]. Te Kupenga 2013 asked respondents how important it was to be involved in things to do with Māori culture. There were five response options, ranging from very important to not at all important [12]. This indicator presents the proportion of respondents who reported it was quite/very important to be engaged in Māori culture. In 2013, just under a third (32.4%) of respondents from Canterbury reported it was quite/very important being engaged in Māori culture. The proportion was lowest for Canterbury, followed by the rest of the South Island (38.1%), and New Zealand overall (46.3%). Data Sources Source: Statistics New Zealand. Survey/data set: Te Kupenga 2013. Access publicly available data from the Statistics New Zealand website www.archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_communities/maori/te-kupenga.aspx Source data frequency: Updated in 2018 and then 10-yearly. Metadata for this indicator is available at https://www.canterburywellbeing.org.nz/index-data © Crown copyright 2021 Printed on: 30/09/2021 Page: 1/3 REFERENCES This is the full reference list for He Tohu Ora.
    [Show full text]
  • Worth the Wait -Navigating the 2018 New Zealand Census
    7 8 9 4 5 6 x _ 1 2 3 0 = + Worth the wait A simple guide to navigating the 2018 New Zealand Census April 2019 Introduction 3 Context History of the Census – a global tradition 4 History of the Census – New Zealand 5 Do all countries undertake a Census? 5 Can we trust Census data? 6 How councils use Census data 7 What happened with the New Zealand 2018 Census? Contents Why was the response rate to the 2018 Census so low? 8 What is Stats NZ doing to get the Census data sorted? 8 Changes to the 2018 Census Which questions have been changed? 10 Changes to geography – SA1 and SA2s 16 Meshblocks 17 SA1 geography (Statistical area 1) 17 SA2 geography (Statistical area 2) 17 Urban rural areas 18 Telling a change over time story Comparing old and new boundaries 19 How .id can help 19 About .id The .id community suite 21 profile.id 21 atlas.id 21 forecast.id 22 The 2018 Census data will be released later this year. It’s a big deal because Census data is a rich source of socio-demographic and socio-economic information at a small area, territorial, regional and national level. The 2018 Census also ushered in a number of changes to the questions asked, the geography collected for, and ultimately to the data sources (as a consequence of patchy response rates). This eBook is intended as a resource for planners and strategists to better understand the implications of these changes. Introduction 3 Worth the wait: A simple guide to navigating the 2018 census Before discussing the nuts and bolts of Census changes, it is worth pausing for a moment to consider the history of our New Zealand Census in an international context, and the profound value of Census data.
    [Show full text]
  • New Analytics Tools for Workload Planning for the 2018 New Zealand Census
    Centre for eResearch New analytics tools for workload planning for the 2018 New Zealand Census Assoc Professor Andrew Mason, Engineering Science, the University of Auckland. Geoff Leyland, Incremental Ltd. Chris Hodgins, John Crequer Craig Lange, Hayley Gargiulo, Philippa Sowman and Chris Deake, Statistics New Zealand Background New Zealand’s next census will take place in March 2018. The census is an official count of all the people and dwellings in New Zealand, and will involve around two-and-a- half-thousand field officers and cover almost two million households. This is a large field operation with officers observing or visiting every dwelling in the country at least once. The operation confirms the locations of known dwellings and identifies new ones to ensure that Statistics New Zealand’s address list is Meshblocks in the Auckland Region up-to-date. New Zealand is divided into around 53,000 areas called “meshblocks”. Each meshblock contains roughly the same number of dwellings. The census involves a field officer visiting every dwelling in each meshblock. Additional work may include following up with non-respondents after the census day. For the first time in New Zealand, the census will use the internet as the primary mode of response. The operation will cover the same geographical area as in previous censuses, but with fewer field officers working across the country. Fieldwork has already begun for the 2018 Census. Over 80% of dwellings were visited between June and August 2017 by a team of over two hundred field officers as part of an operation called “Address Canvassing”. By the time the census gets underway in March 2018, every dwelling in the country will have been observed or visited by one of the teams of field officers, building the BUILDING 302,LEVEL 5, ROOM 585 23 SYMONDS STREET AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND 1 WWW.ERESEARCH.AUCKLAND.AC.NZ Centre for eResearch most up-to-date record of where people in New Zealand live.
    [Show full text]
  • Religion Distinctiveness*
    RAI data Religion distinctiveness* Country profiles *This document provides data production information for the RAI- Rokkan dataset. Last edited on October 7, 2020 Compiled by Gary Marks with research assistance by Noah Dasanaike Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks (2016). Community, Scale and Regional Governance: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance, Vol. II. Oxford: OUP. Sarah Shair-Rosenfield, Arjan H. Schakel, Sara Niedzwiecki, Gary Marks, Liesbet Hooghe, Sandra Chapman-Osterkatz (2021). “Language difference and Regional Authority.” Regional and Federal Studies, Vol. 31. DOI: 10.1080/13597566.2020.1831476 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5 Albania ........................................................................................................................... 6 Argentina ....................................................................................................................... 9 Australia ...................................................................................................................... 12 Austria .......................................................................................................................... 14 Bahamas ....................................................................................................................... 16 Bangladesh ................................................................................................................... 17 Barbados .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Methods and Procedures for International Social Survey
    1 Methods and procedures for International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) 2019 Social Inequality V New Zealand Martin von Randow Barry Milne COMPASS Research Centre November 2020 2 This report summarises the sampling procedures for the New Zealand ISSP survey for 2019 (social inequality), conducted early in 2020. We used results from the New Zealand ISSP survey for 2018 to estimate response numbers for ethnicity, gender and age, and inform our stratification methodology. The methods report for that survey is available at http://tinyurl.com/compass-issp, along with more information about our work on ISSP surveys. We added an eldest age group (>75 years), as the age range for the 2018 survey was capped at age 75. Other than that, we used the same stratum divisions as in 2018. There were 40 strata: 4 ‘ethnic’ (Māori descent, high Pacific geographical meshblocks, high Asian geographical meshblocks, remainder) × 2 gender (male, female) × 5 age (18–30, 31–45, 46–60, 61–75, 76+). Sampling from the New Zealand Electoral Rolls, we had a direct Māori descent indicator, but nothing for any other ethnicity. We identified “high Pacific” and “high Asian” meshblocks using published ethnicity counts for each geographical meshblock, the smallest unit measured by Statistics NZ, as at the 2013 New Zealand Census of Population and Dwellings. Data from the 2018 Census were not available at the time of sampling. In order to have sufficient numbers to sample in every stratum, we described “High Pacific” meshblocks as those where Pacific ethnicities made up at least 15% of the population, and “High Asian” meshblocks as those where Asian ethnicities made up at least 25%.
    [Show full text]
  • Populism and Electoral Politics in New Zealand
    A POPULIST EXCEPTION? THE 2017 NEW ZEALAND GENERAL ELECTION A POPULIST EXCEPTION? THE 2017 NEW ZEALAND GENERAL ELECTION EDITED BY JACK VOWLES AND JENNIFER CURTIN Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] Available to download for free at press.anu.edu.au ISBN (print): 9781760463854 ISBN (online): 9781760463861 WorldCat (print): 1178915541 WorldCat (online): 1178915122 DOI: 10.22459/PE.2020 This title is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The full licence terms are available at creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode Cover design and layout by ANU Press Cover photograph: Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Green Party leader James Shaw standing in ‘unity’ at the stand up after the ‘Next steps in Government’s Plan for NZ’ speech at AUT, Auckland. © Stuff Limited. This edition © 2020 ANU Press CONTENTS List of Figures and Tables . vii Acknowledgements . xiii Jennifer Curtin and Jack Vowles The Populist Exception? The 2017 New Zealand General Election . 1 Jack Vowles, Jennifer Curtin and Fiona Barker 1 . Populism and Electoral Politics in New Zealand . 9 Fiona Barker and Jack Vowles 2 . Populism and the 2017 Election—The Background . 35 Jack Vowles 3 . Measuring Populism in New Zealand . 71 Lara Greaves and Jack Vowles 4 . Populism, Authoritarianism, Vote Choice and Democracy . 107 Jack Vowles 5 . Immigration and Populism in the New Zealand 2017 Election . 137 Kate McMillan and Matthew Gibbons 6 . Gender, Populism and Jacinda Ardern . 179 Jennifer Curtin and Lara Greaves 7 .
    [Show full text]
  • EMBARGOED UNTIL NOON 24 JULY 2018 Te Mana Raraunga Statement
    EMBARGOED UNTIL NOON 24 JULY 2018 Te Mana Raraunga Statement on 2018 New Zealand Census of Population and Dwellings: A Call for Action on Māori Census Data 24 July 2018 The five-yearly Census of Population and Dwellings is the flagship of the Official Statistics System (OSS) and is essential for many of the functions that underpin democracy. Te Mana Raraunga, the Māori Data Sovereignty Network, is concerned that Census 2018 may fail to deliver high quality Māori and iwi data. Te Mana Raraunga supports a comprehensive independent review of Census 2018 and calls for Māori governance of Māori data across the entire Official Statistics System. Problems with the 2018 Census and Stats NZ response Interim figures for the 2018 Census released by Stats NZ indicate that full or partial information has only been received for about 90 percent of individuals, compared with 94.5 percent for the 2013 Census1. Given that a key goal of the census is to count all usual residents in the country on census night2, commentators are rightly concerned that up to ten percent of the population may be missing3. For Māori, the extent of the problem will inevitably be worse. Census 2018 may yet turn out to be the poorest quality enumeration of Māori in recent history. But how poor? Stats NZ will not have a definitive answer for some months yet but the early signs are not positive. Let’s begin with the ‘full or partial’ information received by 90 percent of individuals. One might have the impression that ‘partial’ information means incomplete information on an individual’s census form.
    [Show full text]
  • Housing That Lacks Basic Amenities in Aotearoa New Zealand, 2018
    Housing that Lacks Basic Amenities in Aotearoa New Zealand, 2018 A supplement to the 2018 Census Estimate of Severe Housing Deprivation Helen Viggers, Dr Kate Amore, Professor Philippa Howden-Chapman He Kainga Oranga, Housing and Health Research Programme University of Otago, Wellington www.healthyhousing.org.nz May 2021 Page | 1 Disclaimer Access to the data used in this study was provided by Stats NZ under conditions designed to give effect to the security and confidentiality provisions of the Statistics Act 1975. The results presented in this study are the work of the authors, not Stats NZ or individual data suppliers. The views and interpretations in this report are those of the researchers and not the official position of Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga – Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. Acknowledgements We would like to warmly acknowledge the expert assistance from our colleagues Miranda Devlin, Dr Rosemary Goodyear, June Atkinson, Nick Garrett, Angela Fabian and Keriata Stuart. Page | 2 Table of Contents Table of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 5 Key Results ................................................................................................................................ 8 Dwellings lacking basic amenities ......................................................................................... 8 Severely deprived dwellings which lack basic amenities and the residents have low income ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nzdep2018 Index of Deprivation
    Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington NZDep2018 Index of Deprivation June Atkinson1, Clare Salmond2, Peter Crampton3 Interim Research Report, December 2019 1 Senior Data Analyst, Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington 2 Biostatistician, Private contractor, Wellington 3 Professor of Public Health, Kōhatu, Centre for Hauora Māori, University of Otago, Dunedin E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Address: PO Box 7343, Wellington, New Zealand Phone: 04 385 5541 (ext. 6085) Suggested citation: Atkinson J, Salmond C, Crampton P (2019). NZDep2018 Index of Deprivation, Interim Research Report, December 2019. Wellington: University of Otago. 1 NZDep2018 Index of Deprivation (December 2019) Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington Contents List of tables 5 List of figures 5 The authors 6 Acknowledgements 7 Ethics and confidentiality 7 Executive Summary 8 Why is this an interim report? 10 Introduction 11 NZDep methodological papers 12 NZDep research reports 13 Research papers illustrating applications of NZDep 13 Atlases 14 Aim 16 Purpose of indexes 16 Cautions 17 The indicator becomes the reality 17 Area versus individual measures 17 Relative versus absolute deprivation 18 Apparent simplicity 18 Longitudinal comparisons 18 Constructing the index 19 Overview 19 Data sources 19 Defining small areas 20 Choice of variables for inclusion in NZDep2018 21 The effect of mitigation 21 Variables in NZDep2018 22 Possible new candidate variables
    [Show full text]