Transcript Slide 1
Just how comparative are comparative statistics? Roger Jowell Centre for Comparative Social Surveys City University LLAKES International Conference Why bother with comparative social statistics? Discovering differences and similarities “Comparative sociology is not a particular branch of sociology. It is sociology itself.” Durkheim Understanding one’s own society Critical for cross-national governance Helps challenge national stereotypes But comparisons ideally needed both between countries AND over time www.europeansocialsurvey.org Obstacles to cross-national social measurement Cultural incompatibilities The language barrier Breaching the ‘principle of equivalence’ Temptation of league tables Clash between standards and consistency Differences in methodological capacity Differences in methodological habits www.europeansocialsurvey.org Overcoming the obstacles – at least partially Ensuring equivalence of methods in all countries: Sampling Mode of data collection Language equivalence Concept equivalence Meticulous documentation Consultative design, not ‘safari’ method Contextual variables www.europeansocialsurvey.org A case history - the European Social Survey Multinational time series, started 2001 34 countries so far Contributes to scholarship and governance Large training component and potential Several substantive and methodological innovations Widespread usage www.europeansocialsurvey.org Five main aims To chart and explain changes in Europe’s social, political and moral climate To achieve and spread high standards of rigour in comparative social measurement To establish new indicators of societal well-being to stand alongside existing factual and behavioural indicators To facilitate quantitative monitoring of value change by academics, policymakers, businesses and the public To create and maintain a new contextual data repository www.europeansocialsurvey.org ESS Countries Iceland Luxembourg Bulgaria Germany Netherlands Poland Slovenia Hungary Czech Republic Austria Estonia Ukraine Belgium Latvia Denmark Switzerland Russia Sweden Turkey Lithuania Headquarters London, UK Israel France Italy Slovakia Portugal Spain Romania Ireland Croatia Norway Finland Greece UK Cyprus ESS Countries by Round COUNTRY R1 R2 R3 R4 COUNTRY R1 R2 R3 R4 Austria Latvia x x Belgium Lithuania x x x Bulgaria x x Luxembourg x x Croatia x x x Netherlands Cyprus x x Norway Czech x x Poland Denmark Portugal Estonia x Romania x x Finland Russia x x France Slovakia x Germany Slovenia Greece x Spain Hungary Sweden Iceland x x x Switzerland Ireland Turkey x x Israel x x Ukraine x Italy x x UK Funding story to date Initiated and seed-funded by European Science Foundation Then core-funded for five biennial rounds (to date) by European Commission National costs of each round met by national academic funding councils Over 30 separate funding decisions each round Now selected as a prospective ‘ESFRI’ Research Infrastructure with prospect of long-term funding www.europeansocialsurvey.org Question clusters – some core, some rotating Trust in institutions Citizen engagement Socio-political values Immigration Moral & social attitudes Quality of life Crime and security Value orientations Perceptions of criminal justice www.europeansocialsurvey.org National, ethnic, religious ID Health and welfare issues Life course perceptions Ageism Work and family life Education and occupation Financial circumstances Household circumstances Demographic composition Outreach 32,000 registered data users to date (2500+ in UK) On-line bibliography of publications based on ESS contains: 236 journal articles, 36 books and 90 chapters so far Data increasingly deployed in policy debates Training courses heavily over-subscribed Influence on comparative methods well beyond Europe www.europeansocialsurvey.org A few summary findings www.europeansocialsurvey.org Education and Political Interest Education and Interest in Politics in 22 countries 80 % 'very' or 'fairly' interested in politics 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6 or fewer years 7 8 9 10 11 12 Years in education www.europeansocialsurvey.org 13 14 15 16 17 or more years Four Dimensions of Institutional Trust… Trust in the police varies but is high… Ukraine Turkey Slovakia Russia Iceland Austria 8 7 Belgium Sw itzerland Czech Republic 6 Germany 5 Denmark 4 3 Estonia Spain 2 1 Cyprus Finland 0 Bulgaria France Slovenia United Kingdom Sw eden Greece Portugal Hungary Poland Norw ay Netherlands Ireland Italy Luxembourg Trust in the police Israel Four Dimensions of Institutional Trust… Ukraine Turkey Slovakia Austria 8 7 Belgium Sw itzerland Czech Republic 6 Russia Trust in the legal Iceland system is Estonia lower…. Germany 5 Denmark 4 3 Spain 2 1 Cyprus Finland 0 Bulgaria France Slovenia United Kingdom Sw eden Greece Portugal Hungary Poland Norw ay Netherlands Ireland Italy Israel Luxembourg Trust in the legal system Trust in the police Four Dimensions of Institutional Trust… Ukraine Turkey Slovakia Russia Iceland 7 Belgium Sw itzerland Czech Republic 6 Germany 5 Denmark 4 3 Estonia Trust in national parliaments is lower still… Austria 8 Spain 2 1 Cyprus Finland 0 Bulgaria France Slovenia United Kingdom Sw eden Greece Portugal Hungary Poland Norw ay Netherlands Ireland Italy Israel Luxembourg Trust in country's parliament Trust in the legal system Trust in the police Four Dimensions of Institutional Trust… Ukraine Turkey Slovakia Russia Iceland Austria 8 7 Belgium Sw itzerland Czech Republic 6 Germany 5 Denmark 4 3 Estonia Spain 2 1 Cyprus Finland 0 Bulgaria France Slovenia United Kingdom Sw eden Trust in politicians is the lowest of all. Trust in politicians Greece Portugal Hungary Poland Norw ay Netherlands Ireland Italy Israel Luxembourg Trust in country's parliament Trust in the legal system Trust in the police Attitudes to migration Surges of xenophobia associated with economic downturns New dangers of recession But education matters More education, less xenophobia, greater sympathy towards cultural diversity Educated are more accepting of all newcomers, even of potential labour market competitors www.europeansocialsurvey.org 10 Laws of comparative research www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 1 Don’t confuse respect for cultural differences with tolerance of methodological anarchy www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 2 Never design questions or interpret data about a country one knows little or nothing about www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 3 Confine cross-national studies to the smallest number of nations compatible with the study’s intellectual needs www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 4 Pay as much attention to collecting aggregate-level background information about each country as to individual-level variables www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 5 Always be at least as absorbed by the limitations of the data as about their explanatory power www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 6 Assume initially that any major ‘new’ cross-national variation one discovers is an artefact www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 7 Resist the temptation to produce ‘geewhiz’ league tables containing every nation in every analysis www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 8 Undertake collective, study-specific, multi-national development work and pre-testing www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 9 Routinely include methodological experiments in cross-national studies www.europeansocialsurvey.org Law 10 Ensure that cross-national datasets are accompanied by detailed methodological reports about procedures and outcomes in each nation www.europeansocialsurvey.org