1 / 11

Interpreting the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2009

Interpreting the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2009. Presentation to SCOTSTAT Small Area Statistics event, 5 th October 2010 James Arnott Development & Regeneration Services Glasgow City Council. Scottish Government Analysis. Improvements in Glasgow

megan-kerr
Download Presentation

Interpreting the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interpreting the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2009 Presentation to SCOTSTAT Small Area Statistics event, 5th October 2010 James Arnott Development & Regeneration Services Glasgow City Council

  2. Scottish Government Analysis • Improvements in Glasgow • Concentrations of multiple deprivation becoming more spread out geographically • Concentrations of deprivation in the most deprived datazones reduced slightly • Most datazones moving out of 15% 2004-06 remained out in 09 • Most datazones in 15% in 09 also in 15% in 04 & 06

  3. Glasgow: Datazones in Bottom 15%

  4. Glasgow Population by SIMD Category

  5. Further Development of Analysis Identification of other categories • 1%-5% persistent deprivation • Moving out of the 1% to 15% category • From the 16%-50% to 51%-100% categories • Large moves within categories

  6. Issues Arising • Drivers of change • Areas of persistent deprivation • Displacement • Increasing inequalities: within the 1%-15% category; between the 1%-15% and 16%-100% • Which policy to reduce deprivation

  7. Caveats • Measure of deprivation not overall prosperity: increasingly measures absence not presence • Possibility of exaggerating the significance of small reductions in deprivation • Difference between datazone boundaries and natural communities

  8. Outcomes • Ability of the city to maintain reductions in deprivation • Designing a suitable approach towards monitoring • Turning the focus towards specific communities

  9. Next Steps • Weathervane areas combining deprivation with stability and improvement • Combine small area information with local knowledge to monitor trends • Use as an early indication of trends within the wider city

More Related