English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The paper compares and contrasts internal migration measured by healthcard-based administrative data with census figures. This is useful because the collection of population data, its processing, and its dissemination by statistical agencies is becoming more reliant on administrative data. Statistical agencies already use healthcard data to make migration estimates and are increasingly confident about local population estimates from administrative sources. This analysis goes further than this work as it assesses how far healthcard data can produce reliable data products of the kind to which academics are accustomed. It does this by examining migration events versus transitions over a full intercensal period; population flows into and out of small areas; and the extent to which it produces microdata on migration equivalent to that in the census. It is shown that for most demographic groups and places healthcard data is an adequate substitute for census-based migration counts, the exceptions being for student households and younger people. However, census-like information is still needed to provide covariates for analysis and this will still be required whatever the future of the traditional census.

How Does Administrative Data Compare with Census Data for the Measurement of Internal Migration? The Case of Northern Ireland, 2001–2011