Ethnicity

I understand and agree Bruno and I was similarly confused five years ago until I researched the outcome of the 2011 UK Census. In that census the results were perverted by a general misunderstanding of what ethnicity actually means, poorly defined and badly-aggregated ethnic groups, and the skewed nature of the census forms themselves. This resulted in a situation (by accident or design) where the majority of people in Scotland were allowed to select "Scottish" ethnicity, while the majority in England were denied the opportunity to select 'English' ethnicity. Instead their responses were arbitrarily aggregated to 'British' ethnicity. The fact remains then that as far as the British Government and UK Statistics Office are concerned people with an English cultural identity no longer exist in England, and for the next ten years at least they will be excluded from all cultural, arts, ethnic and community funding. The danger here in New Zealand is that unless we all understand what ethnicity means, why this data is being collected and what it is going to be used for, we might just end up with more problems than solutions. Open debate such as this is badly needed.

Another research finding on ethnic differences influencing susceptibility to illnesses. Dr Chambers' 25 year research project identifies genetic differences. "Dr Chambers says the findings highlight an existing inequity in medical treatment. “Medicine today is an increasingly genetic field of knowledge,” he says. “Many new drugs have been developed by Europeans for Europeans, but if we are to deliver these advances effectively to Māori and Pasifika people then we need new information, which we must uncover ourselves. This requires knowing something about their genetic make-up.”

Statistics New Zealand should quantify the size of the groups affected, which could help with planning further medical research.
https://www.victoria.ac.nz/news/2015/06/new-findings-show-the-impact-of-ancestry-on-health

Hi Kay. I can understand why genetic information is important in research and the targeting of effective treatment to specific groups of people, but the definition of ethnicity has changed. As defined on this website and on the 2013 & 2108 Census Form, ethnicity is no longer solely related to race or genetics but to personal preference and self-perception. This suggests that Census responses re. ethnicity can no longer be relied on as a genetics indicator.

So we have many concepts being discussed.

There is country of birth - in the past that might have told one something about a person's race, ethnicity or ancestry (whatever we want to call it) - but increasingly that doesn't tell us much - for example British Asians migrate to New Zealand, people are moving all the round the world, intermarrying, mixing it all up.

The we have race, which some people still take about in New Zealand but, for a whole set of good reasons, is a concept social social scientists have moved away from. Yet we have a "Race Relations' Office and politicians often talk about playing the race card.

Then there is ancestry. Ancestry is a slippery concept. How far does one go back? (all the way to Africa - listen to Kim Hill tomorrow about that) Do we have complete knowledge of our ancestry? Ancestries get dropped along the way, and sometimes they get rediscovered. In New Zealand statistics we only ask about Maori ancestry.

Then there is ethnicity. More or less cultural affiliation. But for most people somewhat influenced by ancestry (but with all the problems of above). The ethnicity data shows lots of mixing - many people reporting more than one ethnic group.

Then it seems there are some situations where it doesn't matter what you think your identity is – it matters what others think you are – one can think of landlords – or the police pulling one over. Of as written about in the Herald yesterday lending to Maori. This will be based on ‘visible difference’ such as skin colour, or in terms of being pulled over whether one wears a cap back to front and drives a Subaru imprezza etc. Rachel Dolezel (the women in the US claiming to be African American) is finding that it is not what she thinks she is that matters, its what other people think.

Then there are other situations where it doesn't matter what you think you identity is – it only matters what scientific testing tells your doctors about compatibility for transplants etc - or proving through a DNA test to the Family Court that the child you are paying maintenance for belongs to someone else. And it doesnt matter if you are simply from a group such as European, you have to get down to individual DNA tests.

The genetic tests also show lots of mixing between 'races'. So that complicates any idea of 'race based medicine'

Then in NZ there are situations where ‘provable’ ancestry matters – such as belonging to an iwi, getting a scholarship or being eligible to vote in a Maori seat, else. But this ancestry information is not good enough for transplants, the Family Court etc.

ethnicity matters much less in daily life and public policy – it might matter lots for some individuals in terms of how they feel about themselves but for many others it just one part of identity – group measures give some idea of how a set of loosely bounded people are doing – but often the analysis is at such a high level it doesn't really tell one much (for example the Maori/non-Maori comparison). It can lead indirectly to a bit of funding through the health sector but not much else.

So lots of opportunities for people to talk past each other.

Paul. Sadly in the areas you mention, which are highly personal and emotive for a large proportion of the general public, the picture you paint is one of complete confusion. The first step surely is for politicians, statisticians and other data users to come up with a clear definition of each 'indicator' and an explanation as to why the data is needed, who needs it, and what it is being used for. Only when the reasoning behind the Census question becomes apparent will individuals know how to properly respond. To date there has been little compelling reason to include the ethnicity question, which in the 2011 UK census for instance became something of a political football.

There’s been some great discussion in this thread so far! I just want to encourage anyone who wishes to, please take advantage of our formal submission process before our engagement and consultation closes. All the discussions on loomio will be formally assessed but sending in a formal submission adds weight to your perspective on what census needs to do, or change, to meet information needs around measurement of ethnicity.