Tuesday, May 30, 2017

LIM 40 and LIM 50 data for 2016

A researcher at McMaster needs access to LIM 40 and LIM 50 fixed cutoffs for 2016. The latest data tables I can find on CANSIM are for 2015. Is LIM data for 2016 available yet?

LIM50 is available and published in the CANSIM table 206-0091. LIM40 is only available as a custom request. The latest data available has just been released for the 2015 reference year.

Followup Question
I am aware of this CANSIM table but the researcher is interested in 2016 reference year data. Can you please find out when that data will be released? LIM40 information is useful and I will share it with the researcher.

Followup Answer
Unfortunately reference year 2016 will not be released until around this time next year. 2015 was just released on May 26th, 2017.

Census of Agriculture - lowest level of geog available to capture a DP

I also have a Census of Agriculture request and am trying to figure out if the Census of Agriculture captures data at the DA level?
Our researcher is looking at Lindell Beach (and its immediate environs) in BC which is a DP and so smaller obviously than a CAR but also a CSD or CD.

The lowest level of geography available for dissemination is the Census Consolidated Subdivision (CCS).

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Census of Agriculture

I have a researcher interested in the type of technologies (Step 23) used on farms based on gender, age, commodity (Step 6 and 28), gross farm receipts (Step 31), business operation expenses and total farm capital by census consolidated subdivision (CCS), Census Division (CD), Census agricultural region (CAR) . We have looked at the Farm and Farm Operator Data but it doesn't have this data. It this data available?

The Census of Agriculture team has provided us with an excel file that is comprised of farm and farm operator data (Canada, Province, CAR, CD and CCS) for 2016. The file is attached to this email.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Historical census data for Burnaby

I must be missing something obvious. I'm looking for aggregated census data from 1901 and 1911 for Burnaby. For those Censuses, Burnaby was included in New Westminster.

Using Scholars GeoPortal, I can identify the subdivision/enumeration areas in which Burnaby falls (several!) but am stymied on obtaining population numbers/characteristics. The closest I have come is this:
http://hcmc.uvic.ca/~taprhist/content/documents/abstract1901.php which lists Burnaby as part of Richmond.

The Census boundaries were produced as part of a larger census digitization project called the Canadian Census Research Infrastructure (CCRI). Part of this project included microdata creation and digitization of aggregate census tables that can be used with the boundaries for mapping. The most comprehensive online database I’ve come across is hosted at the University of Alberta:

CCRI produced digital data for 1911-1951: https://dataverse.library.ualberta.ca/dvn/dv/CCRI

For 1901, I know there is a 1901 Microdata file which was produced by UVic researchers, it is available online from UBC Abacus and <odesi>

You can also find PDF scans of data tables for the districts in the Internet Archive
Fourth Census of Canada, 1901, vol. I (Internet Archive)
Fourth Census of Canada, 1901, vol. II (Internet Archive)
Fourth Census of Canada, 1901, vol. III (Internet Archive)
Fourth Census of Canada, 1901, vol. IV (Internet Archive)
(IA listing curtsey of MDL, University of Toronto)

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

AgCensus: wild boars

I have a question from a faculty member who’s researching wild boar production. In 2011, the census of Agriculture asked specifically about this (question 160), but in 2016 wild boar are lumped into the “other livestock” category (question 162), with respondents having the option to specify which type of critters they’re raising. Is there a way to extract wild boar production figures for 2016?

Unfortunately for 2016, wild boars are reported under the “other” livestock write-in cell of the questionnaire. The components of “other” cannot be released individually at this point in time due to quality concerns.

Childhood obesity -- data sources

I am helping a researcher who is looking for data on childhood obesity.

He has used data form the CCHS but would like to have data for younger children (the CCHS deals with people 12 and older). I know that the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) is interested in people from 3 to 79 years old, but I could not find the data dictionary on Nesstar or anywhere else. Also, the researcher has been told that there are other survey(s) conducted by Health Canada that could provide some data on childhood obesity but so far I have not been able to unearth anything else that was recent.

So I have essentially two questions:
1. Can someone provide me with the data dictionary or at least a detailed list of variables for the CHMS Master File, ideally for cycle 4?
2. Does anyone know of other Canadian surveys that would have data on childhood obesity (other than the CCHS, the CHMS or the discontinued National Population Health Survey)?

Answer 1
The CHMS did not produce a PUMF for this survey, and the Masterfile metadata has not been coded in Nesstar yet. We will add this to our list of coding priorities. I’ve reached out to the Health Statistics Division to see if there is a zero-count data dictionary that they can provide for cycle 4 of the CHMS.

For the CHMS, there is no codebook for the entire cycle, its broken down into components.

Answer 2
[This is d]iscontinued as well, but I’d recommend taking a look at the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY) http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=4450  I think that both the longitudinal and cross-sectional data from that are available through the RDC programme? We stopped getting PUMFs after [Cycle 3?]?

Yes, you are right, we have PUMFs for the first 3 cycles only, after that it would have to be the RDC’s master files. I did not remember that there were so many cycles (8) and that the last one (2008-2009) was still relatively recent. So given the richness of this data it may indeed be interesting for the researcher.

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Bradburn Affect Scale

Question 1
I have a researcher looking for datasets containing the Bradburn Affect Scale. The CCHS (2001, 2013-2014) reference these. Are there others?

Answer 1
I searched through the DLI Microdata Search and found the following survey and applicable variables:

The General Social Survey, cycle 6, 1991 – Health has the following variables:

DVPOSAFF references the Bradburn positive affect scale

DVNEGAFF references the Bradburn negative affect scale

DVAFBAK and DVAFBAL2 reference the Bradburn affect balance

And as you mentioned, the CCHS 2014 and 2013-2014 also reference the scale the variable DOMDB. I hope this helps!

Question 2
Thank you for this. The researcher was hoping for something more recent. Is it possible to find out if future cycles of CCHS will include the Bradburn Affect Scale (including the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale)?

Answer 2
Here is the response we have received from the subject matter expert on the CCHS:

“When the CCHS was redesigned in 2015, the MDB module (which uses the Bradburn Affect Scale) was not included in the work. It does not currently exist as available content for provinces to choose as optional. Unless the provinces ask us to develop and offer that content again, I don’t think it will be included in the survey again any time soon.

The Rosenberg self-esteem scale was partially used in 2015 in Ontario, British Columbia, and Northwest Territories. I say partially because only six of the ten questions were used:

Q005: You feel that you have a number of good qualities.

Q010: You feel that you’re a person of worth at least equal to others.

Q015: You are able to do things as well as most other people.

Q020: You take a positive attitude toward yourself.

Q025: Overall, you are satisfied with yourself.

Q030: All in all, you’re inclined to feel you’re a failure.

It also looks like we used a modified version of the scale, in which we included a ‘neither agree nor disagree’ category along with the four usual: strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree.

While SFE was included in 2015, it was not in 2016. So the module will not be on the next PUMF since we only produce PUMFs on two-year files. The researcher would have to access the SFE data through the RDC on the master file for 2015, or else request a custom tabulation.”

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

2016 Census Release -- Age & Sex

Just looking over today's release, I note that in 2016, there are average ages posted for all geographic units except census tracts, where median age is given. Previous census years used average age everywhere. What's the reasoning behind using median age for census tracts?

"Here's the reason why we moved to average age instead of median age:

In the past, Statistics Canada has been using median age as an indicator summarizing population age structure.  However, we have decided to move to average age in 2016.  Among others, a reason for the change is the fact that median age will not adjust as well when all baby boomers have moved to older ages. Median age does not account for shifts in the age structure at older ages, as it only divides the population in two groups of equal size.  Mean age will adjust better for the changes in the age distribution at older ages, for example when boomers reach age 85 and above.

Thus, as population aging has just accelerated in Canada, we believe mean age will be more consistent with the other key messages than median age."

Historical Census Tabulation

Is it possible to have a custom tabulation made from an historical census?

Yes, custom tabulations are available for all Census/NHS years up until 1971. You’ll have to contact your nearest regional office for this tabulation.