Home ] Up ] Work & Campaigns ] My Books ] Published Articles ] En d'Autres Langues ] CV/Short bio/Misc ] Search this Website ]

 People & Parliament Part 6 - Statistics


Click Links from the Menu below to Navigate the People & Parliament Report

Summary and Contents Part 3 - Political Process Sample Participant Forms
Part 0 - Methodology Part 4 - Raw Data Related Material: The Parekh Report
Part 1- Identities Part 5 - Sources Embracing Multicultural Scotland Report
Part 2 - Vision Part 6 - Statistics Le Monde Diplomatique Article



People & Parliament

Part 6 of the Full Report - Statistical Analysis of Sources



6. Statistical Analysis


437 completed forms were returned to People & Parliament by 9 February 1999. All of these were fully taken into consideration. Quotations have been drawn proportionately more from forms received earlier since later ones often repeated the same points.


Over and above these 437 forms, about 20 of the groups which participated in the pilot study used mainly participative appraisal techniques that did not result in forms being completed. (People & Parliament is grateful to Vikki Hilton of Edinburgh University and David Wilding from England for their expert help respectively with the pilot study and the thinking that surrounded it.) These particular pilot study statements have been consolidated into the composite group, numbered “0,” comprising an estimated 100 people. Allowing also for groups that have been sending in forms too late to be fully considered in the study, this means that the total number of participating groups is well in excess of 450; indeed, it will probably end up at near enough 500.


The 437 groups received in time for full analysis claimed to have involved a total of 9,004 people in their deliberations. However, it was quite clear that many groups simply stated their membership size. Others failed to state any number - these are indicated with a 0. Some groups, we know, consolidated a number of smaller groups into one form. In short, our sense of the “true” number of People & Parliament participants is that a figure of about 3,000 would be accurate.



Group Identification Category Statistics


It was an objective of People & Parliament to reach many different sectors of  Scottish society, but to target especially those whose voices are normally under-represented. The following statistics suggest a measure of success in reaching groups that are often marginalised, though the geographical distribution of responses, whilst wide-ranging, is not representative. However, an analysis of statements by geographical distribution revealed no discernible regional differences. Of course, had the study been undertaken using quantitative rather than qualitative methods, we would have expected some differences to have emerged on specific questions consistent with the findings of other studies.




Female (f)                         70          16%

Male (m)                           21          4.8%

Unspecified                     346        79.2%


Totals                                437        100%


Groups could only be classified as single-gender when they had identified themselves as such. It might be the case that many all-male groups might have thought there was nothing exceptional about being all-male, whilst all-female groups might have been more conscious of their group’s single-sex make-up and therefore remarked upon it. Also, many of the groups were community or church-related groups, and these tend to have higher proportions of women in them.


Disability (d)


49 groups comprising 11.9% consisted of people with a disability of one sort or another.


Ethnicity (e)


30 groups comprising 6.9% consisted of ethnic minorities, including indigenous ethnic minorities.


Older People (o)


33 groups comprising 7.5% described themselves using such adjectives as “retired,” “elderly,” and “pensioners.”


Youth (y)


78 groups comprising 17.8% described themselves with such adjectives as “pupils,” “youth” and “student.”


Group Types


Community Organisations (c)                  164        37.5%

Religious groups (r )                                  79          18.1%

Family or neighbour groups (f)                  21          4.8%

Professional groups (p)                             32          7.4%

Individuals (v)                                              14          3.2%

Schools & youth groups (y)                       76          17.4%

Political & governmental (l)                       10          2.3%

Industry (i)                                                    5            1.1%

Unspecified (?)                                           36          8.2%


Total                                                             437        100%





The column identifying postcodes has been removed from this published version of the report in case it exposed vulnerable groups to identification during the period when the report is first published and media interest is high. However, to indicate geographical spread, the following analysis of postcodes is presented.


AB        48          10.9%

DD        21          4.8%

DG        3            0.7%

EH         72          16.5%

FK         12          2.7%

G           145        33.2%

HS         1            0.2%

IV          14          3.2%

KA        23          5.2%

KW       1            0.2%

KY        34          7.8%

ML        3            0.7%

PA         19          4.3%

PH         14          3.2%

TD        10          2.3%

ZE         0            0.0%

?            17          3.9%

India     1            0.2%    


Total     435        100%


Euro-Constituency Regions - Population Comparisons


Postcodes for the 421 groups where these were provided were approximately mapped onto Euro-constituency regions and compared with the percentage of the Scottish population living in those areas. This shows representation in all areas, but not evenly distributed.


Urban areas are more highly represented than rural ones. This is probably because a number of regional events were organised in urban areas. Some of the urban-based groups would therefore have comprised rural peoples. A second factor is that it is easier for urban groups to meet because of reduced travel distances. Thirdly, the fact that we targeted marginalised groups, especially those affected by poverty, probably accounts for most if not all of the strong representation from Glasgow.


Constituency                                Population       % Scot/Pop     No/Groups       %Groups


Highlands & Islands                     428,750              8.4%                   23                         5.5%

West of Scotland                         603,840              11.8%                 33                         7.8%

Mid Scotland & Fife                    611,280              11.9%                 59                         14.0%

Glasgow                                       667,540              13.0%                 124                      29.5%

Lothians                                        683,000              13.3%                 69                         16.4%

South of Scotland                        697,940              13.6%                 35                         8.3%

North East Scotland                    704,280              13.8%                 68                         16.2%

Central Scotland                          725,870              14.7%                 10                         2.4%






Click Links from the Menu below to Navigate the People & Parliament Report

Summary and Contents Part 3 - Political Process Sample Participant Forms
Part 0 - Methodology Part 4 - Raw Data Related Material: The Parekh Report
Part 1- Identities Part 5 - Sources Embracing Multicultural Scotland Report
Part 2 - Vision Part 6 - Statistics Le Monde Diplomatique Article






Hit Counter