4 ms·

As an Australian, I wonder why I’ve never seen this published on the ABS website?

ACow_Adonis 9y ago
My knowledge could be a few years out of date now, but in all parts of the ABS dealings, there's always been a public policy debate and tension between what I'll call the philosophy of "statistical and policy interpretation of data" and "straight-up statistical reporting with no policy advice or interpretation". That is to say, the tension between being a data collecting and reporting agency, and making interpretations and comments on government policy and context using the data to draw conclusions and comment. The argument for "just report" is that we should strive to let the population interpret the numbers while the ABS just reports certain key figures. This emphasizes the apolitical and independent nature of the ABS. It can also be argued to be the cheaper option. The downside is that arguably the public is less informed. The argument for the later is that numbers and statistics need expert interpretation and contextualization, and who better to inform the nation than the people on the front line with expertise in the subject mattesr and experience with the data. It is seen by many public servants as their job to not only collect and report data, but interpret it and comment on policy as well. The downside is that pushes against the tension of being/appearing apolitical, potentially makes enemies and encroaches upon private enterprise, and expands the scope of the ABS from just being a data collection agency. It also costs more money and time. Over the years, various governments and various statisticians and various subjections have had differences of opinions and different philosophies as to which to fund, support, emphasise and de-emphasise. Now, a phrasing like "nappy valley" would probably not make it into the final reports, but one publication involving investigating of such things called Australian Social Trends. I would say this fell more into the "interpret" camp. See the Nov 2013 edition below for one on pregnancy and return to work. http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/allprimarymainfeatures/5849F483A2C5646ECA257C9E00177D59?opendocument http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/allprimarymainfeatur... You will notice that the last Australian Social Trends publication was in march 2014. Another similar publication I remember from that time was called Measures of Australia's progress: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/1370.0 http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/1370.0 and http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1370.0main+features672013 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1370.0main+fe... Again, i'm not aware of a refresh since 2013/14. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to use wikipedia and see if they can figure out what Australian political events correlate with such dates and the ending of such reports...

My knowledge could be a few years out of date now, but in all parts of the ABS dealings, there's always been a public policy debate and tension between what I'll call the philosophy of "statistical and policy interpretation of data" and "straight-up statistical reporting with no policy advice or interpretation". That is to say, the tension between being a data collecting and reporting agency, and making interpretations and comments on government policy and context using the data to draw conclusions and comment. The argument for "just report" is that we should strive to let the population interpret the numbers while the ABS just reports certain key figures. This emphasizes the apolitical and independent nature of the ABS. It can also be argued to be the cheaper option. The downside is that arguably the public is less informed. The argument for the later is that numbers and statistics need expert interpretation and contextualization, and who better to inform the nation than the people on the front line with expertise in the subject mattesr and experience with the data. It is seen by many public servants as their job to not only collect and report data, but interpret it and comment on policy as well. The downside is that pushes against the tension of being/appearing apolitical, potentially makes enemies and encroaches upon private enterprise, and expands the scope of the ABS from just being a data collection agency. It also costs more money and time. Over the years, various governments and various statisticians and various subjections have had differences of opinions and different philosophies as to which to fund, support, emphasise and de-emphasise. Now, a phrasing like "nappy valley" would probably not make it into the final reports, but one publication involving investigating of such things called Australian Social Trends. I would say this fell more into the "interpret" camp. See the Nov 2013 edition below for one on pregnancy and return to work. http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/allprimarymainfeatures/5849F483A2C5646ECA257C9E00177D59?opendocument http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/allprimarymainfeatur... You will notice that the last Australian Social Trends publication was in march 2014. Another similar publication I remember from that time was called Measures of Australia's progress: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/1370.0 http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/1370.0 and http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1370.0main+features672013 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1370.0main+fe... Again, i'm not aware of a refresh since 2013/14. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to use wikipedia and see if they can figure out what Australian political events correlate with such dates and the ending of such reports...