How much and for whom does self-identified ethnicity change over time in New Zealand? Results from a longitudinal study.
Carter, Kristie N. ; Hayward, Michael ; Blakely, Tony 等
Abstract
Ethnicity is often assumed to be a stable construct. However, much
research in New Zealand has shown growth in the number of people
reporting multiple ethnicities and changes in the ethnic composition of
New Zealand, which may reflect social changes as well as changes in the
construct of ethnicity. This study uses three years of data from the
longitudinal Survey of Family, Income and Employment (SoFIE) to examine
changes in self-identified ethnicity. Self-defined ethnicity is recorded
every year and participants may record multiple ethnicities. A change in
ethnicity was defined as any change in the reported ethnic group(s) of
an individual over the first three waves of SoFIE. Overall, 8% of
respondents changed ethnicity at least once during the three waves of
the survey. The strongest predictor of changing self-identified
ethnicity was Maori, Pacific and Asian ethnicity at wave 1, as well as
reporting more than one ethnic group. Individuals who changed ethnicity
were also more likely to be younger, to be born overseas, to live in a
family with children, to belong to more deprived groups, and to have
poorer self-rated health. This exploratory analysis has shown fluidity
in the concept of self-identified ethnicity, but more longitudinal
research is needed to further clarify the (in)stability of ethnicity
over time.
INTRODUCTION
Ethnicity matters. It matters for individuals, for groups and for
our nation. It matters in terms of shaping individual identity,
understanding inequalities and targeting policy across a wide range of
areas such as health, education and welfare. In New Zealand much work
has been done on defining and measuring ethnicity, but it remains a
challenging, and fluid, area (Statistics New Zealand 2004, Callister et
al. 2008).
The concept that individuals should identify their own ethnicity is
well established in New Zealand. However, an individual's ethnic
identity is part of a wider social process and is influenced by their
own perceptions of ethnicity and what they perceive others'
perceptions are, within the world in which they live (Fenton 1999).
Often it is assumed (if only as a simplification) that ethnicity is
fixed over time and that ethnic boundaries are well defined. In reality
an individual will identify with more than one ethnic group and/or may
change their ethnic identity over time or in different environments
(Callister et al. 2008). Indeed, affiliation with more than one ethnic
group is relatively common: in the 2006 census 7.8% of respondents aged
15 years and older reported multiple ethnic groups (Statistics New
Zealand 2007). Affiliation with multiple ethnic groups was highest in
younger age groups and among those recording Maori or Pacific as one of
their ethnic groups.
Ethnic mobility is defined as a change in ethnic affiliation over
time. It is an important aspect of social change and represents an area
of considerable interest, both in New Zealand and internationally. There
are three possible sources of change in responses about ethnic
affiliation: unreliability in measurement, changes due to alterations in
the ethnicity question, and (the focus of this paper) conscious changes
in ethnicity (Simpson and Akinwale 2007). Conscious changes may involve
an alteration of ethnic identification (switching from one ethnicity to
another), the addition of an ethnic group to (complexification), or
deletion of a group from (simplification), a previous set of
identifications.
Conscious changes in ethnic affiliation(s) may occur for any number
of reasons. For example, changes may occur when children reach an age
when they define ethnicity for themselves rather than having it
determined by a parent or guardian (Kukutai 2008). People may answer a
census question differently to how they answer a hospital form; the
former may be construed as an opportunity to make a more political
statement (e.g. the "New Zealander" response is far more
common on census data than in other administrative data sets), and the
census is answered in the privacy of one's home (Callister et al.
2008).
There are a number of other reasons for people identifying their
ethnicity differently over time or context, such as social
stigmatisation or alienation, changes in personal, professional or
social groups, or changes in the political or economic society.
Comparing ethnic group responses between different data sets in New
Zealand may be invalid because the environment or context can change
responses. In Canada, for example, Guimond (2006) found that the census
count of the population with aboriginal origin went from 711,000 to
1,102,000 persons, with a large part of this growth occurring between
1986 and 1991. He noted that this fast growth could not be explained by
natural and migratory increases alone, and that much ethnic mobility was
occurring. This growth was particularly strong in urban areas and was
associated with a strong rise in the post-secondary-educated graduates
of aboriginal origin. Guimond concluded that it is important to
understand legislative and social changes that may be a source of ethnic
mobility. Each ethnic response is "valid" at the time and
within the context in which it was asked.
In New Zealand, research into ethnic mobility has been limited.
However, in a cross-sectional study of inter-censal change, Coope and
Piesse (2000) found there was considerable mobility within some ethnic
groups, with, for example, a 23% inflow and 6% outflow for the Maori
ethnic group in 1996 compared to the 1991 group (Coope and Piesse 2000).
There are a number of possible reasons for this, including changes in
the ethnicity question between censuses, changes in the socio-political
environment, ethnogenesis (the establishment of new ethnic categories
such as "New Zealander"), and intermarriage (Callister et al.
2005, Howard and Didham 2005, Kukutai 2007, Callister et al. 2008), as
well as changes in the political structure.
In-depth analysis of changes in ethnicity and the factors
associated with such mobility is only possible using consistent
questions repeated over several years of a longitudinal study for the
same individuals. (2) There is, however, no such published New Zealand
empirical research, so in this exploratory analysis we outline changes
in self-identified ethnicity over the first three waves of the
longitudinal Survey of Family, Income, and Employment (SoFIE). The
ethnicity question was asked directly of participants, face to face in
their own home, at each consecutive wave without the interviewer or
interviewee having access to responses to previous waves. Specifically,
the research questions addressed in this paper are:
* What proportion of people changed their self-identified ethnicity
over the three years?
* How does this proportion vary by individual socio-demographics?
METHODS
Study Data
We utilised data from the first three waves (October 2002/03,
2003/04, 2004/05) of SoFIE (wave 1 to 3 data, Version 4) (Carter et al.
2008). SoFIE is a nationally representative fixed-panel longitudinal
survey of the usually resident population living in private dwellings.
The initial SoFIE sample comprised approximately il,500 responding
private households (response rate of 77%) with over 22,000 adults
responding in wave 1, reducing to just over 20,000 in wave 2 (91%) and
18,300 in wave 3 (83% of wave l responders). In SoFIE, face-to-face
interviews are used to collect information annually on demographics and
the social and economic characteristics of adults.
In this analysis, data were restricted to adults (15 years or
older) who answered the ethnicity question in all three waves.
Measures
The following ethnicity question was asked in each wave:
"Looking at showcard 7, choose as many responses as you need
to say which ethnic groups you belong to."
Showcard 7
11. New Zealand European / Pakeha
12. other European
13. Maori
14. Samoan
15. Cook Island Maori
16. Tongan
17. Niuean
18. Tokelauan
19. Fijian
20. other Pacific Peoples
21. Southeast Asian
22. Chinese
23. Indian
24. other Asian
25. other ethnic group
This ethnicity variable was then coded to the following level 1
categories: NZ European / Pakeha, Maori, Pacific, Asian, and Other.
For the purposes of this paper we constructed four variables
relating to ethnicity.
1. Total ethnicity. For simple cross-classifications we simply used
the total counts of people identifying as Maori, Pacific, NZ European,
Asian or "Other". Note that the sum of the total counts will
exceed 17,625 (total number of responding adults) due to people
reporting two or more level 1 ethnic groups (total ethnic groups are not
mutually exclusive).
2. Combination ethnicities I. We categorised people (at each wave)
into those reporting just one level 1 ethnic group ("sole"),
and two or more level I ethnic groups ("multiple"). Note that
someone who self-identified with more than one Pacific or Asian
ethnicity appears as "sole" using the level 1 categorisations
in this paper.
3. Combination ethnicities II. We also constructed variables
separately from the perspective of each of the level 1 groups. Thus,
from the Pacific perspective one could be sole Pacific, Pacific pius at
least one other group, or non-Pacific (any other ethnic group/s
excluding Pacific).
4. Changing ethnicity. We classified anyone changing their
self-identified ethnic group between waves 1 and 2 or between waves 2
and 3 as "change". Respondents may "change" their
self-identified ethnicity by adding or subtracting an ethnic group
to/from their previous wave response (e.g. Pacific and NZ European in
wave 1, and sole Pacific in wave 2 = "change"), or responding
with a totally different category (e.g. sole Maori in wave 1 and sole NZ
European in wave 2 = "change").
The following demographic, social and economic variables have been
used to explore the mechanisms discussed previously and their
relationship with changing ethnic identification over the three waves of
SoFIE. The following demographic characteristics were measured at the
wave 1 interview: age, sex, legal marital status, family structure and
household composition. It is hypothesised that younger populations are
more likely to change their ethnicity because they are developing their
own identity as they grow older. Marital status, family structure and
household composition are used to investigate the influence of social
mechanisms on changing ethnicity. Economic variables allow us to
investigate whether changing ethnicity is more apparent in some social
and economic groups. Household income was derived by totalling adult
annual personal income (before tax) from all sources received, Consumer
Price Index adjusted, equivalised for household economies of scale using
a New Zealand-specific Jensen Index (Jensen 1988), and categorised into
quintiles based on the SoFIE population across waves 1 to 3.
Labour-force involvement was defined as being either employed, not
employed but seeking work, or not employed and not seeking work, at the
time of the interview. The highest level of education was coded as no
education, school, post-school vocational, or degree or higher
qualification, across the three waves. The New Zealand Deprivation
(NZDep2001) Index provides a neighbourhood-level (approximately 100
people) deprivation score (Salmond and Crampton 2002). The global
self-rated health question ("In general would you say your health
is excellent, very good, good, fair or poor?") was classified as
fair/poor versus remaining answers.
These analyses will provide a baseline for future analyses of SoFIE
data (once more waves of data are available) looking at the influences
of changes in social and/or economic circumstances (i.e. moving from
child to adult status, getting married or becoming unemployed) have on
changes in self-identified ethnicity over time.
ANALYSIS
Ali analyses were conducted using SAS 8.2 within the Statistics NZ
Data Lab, Wellington. Exploratory analysis was conducted using
cross-tabulations to identify respondents who change ethnicity between
the waves, by demographic and socio-economic variables. Logistic
regression analyses were used to investigate the relative association of
change in ethnicity by baseline socio-demographic variables.
All counts and values in the tables have been randomly rounded (up
or down) to the nearest multiple of five, and cells with counts less
than 10 were rounded to a minimum of 10. As a result, table totals may
differ from the sum of individual cells. Some row percentages in the
tables may also sum to greater than 100 because the percentages were
calculated according to the random rounded totals.
RESULTS
A total of 17,625 original sample members aged 15 years or older at
the wave 1 interview and who had responded in all three waves were
included in this analysis. Table 1 presents the ethnic composition of
the SoFIE population across the first three waves of SoFIE. Over 83% of
the population reported NZ/European as one of their ethnic groups, with
around 11% Maori, 5% Pacific, 5% Asian and 2% Other ethnicity. There is
little variation in the share of the total ethnic groups in the
population at each wave (although individuals are changing groups
between waves, as shown below).
The majority of people (about 95%) reported that they affiliated
with only one ethnic group (Table 1). This was stable over all three
waves: 5.6% &people in wave 1 reported affiliating with more than
one ethnic group, and in wave 3 this declined to 4.9%. The distribution
of multiple affiliations was not equal: proportionately Maori (38.3%)
and Pacific people (20.8%) were more likely to report affiliation with
more than one ethnic group than NZ European (5.3%), at wave 3. About 10%
of Asian and other ethnic groups reported multiple affiliations. Younger
respondents were also more likely to report multiple ethnic groups.
Table 2 shows the distribution of characteristics of respondents
who had any change in their self-identified ethnicity between waves 1
and 2 and waves 2 and 3. There was no difference between males and
females, but younger respondents were much more likely to change ethnic
groups (e.g. 12.2% for 15-24-year-olds compared to 2.7% for those aged
75 years and over).
The strongest predictor of changing ethnicity between waves was
ethnicity at wave 1. Using a total definition of ethnicity at wave 1,
anyone self-identifying as "Other" (ie, any ethnicity other
than NZ/European, Maori, Pacific or Asian) was the most likely to change
ethnicity between waves (54.7%), followed by Maori (36.5%), Pacific
(22.9%), and Asian (15.4%). NZ/European respondents were least likely to
change ethnicity across the three waves (5.7%).
Alongside considering "total" ethnicity at wave 1,
changing ethnicity was most likely among those people recording two or
more ethnic groups - regardless of the actual combination. People
self-identifying at wave 1 as NZ European and any other group, Maori and
any other group, Pacific and any other group and Asian and any other
group all had similar probabilities (over half) of changing ethnicity
between waves: 56.4%, 57.1%, 62.5% and 63.2%, respectively. Sole
NZ/European were the least likely (2.4%), and sole Asian and sole
Pacific both had about a 10% probability of subsequent change in ethnic
group. Sole Maori, however, had a 21.3% probability of changing
ethnicity over waves.
Considering other socio-demographic factors, there were moderate
increases in the probability of changing ethnicity for those: not born
in New Zealand, never married, living in a family with children (i.e.
couple with children, or sole parent), and in good or fair/poor
self-rated heath (Table 2). (It must be noted that these are all crude
percentages, and likely to be confounded by age and ethnicity at
least--hence the multivariable analyses below.) Finally, the crude
analyses demonstrate two- to three-fold differences in the chance of
changing ethnic groups for those with low income or living in a deprived
neighbourhood.
Table 3 presents results from logistic regression models. The first
column contains univariate regressions, which are consistent with the
results in Table 2, aside from being on an odds ratio scale. However,
any of the univariate associations attenuate once all factors are
adjusted for in the multivariate analyses. Multivariate logistic
regression analyses were conducted by each ethnic group at wave i, both
to investigate what factors influence changing ethnicity within the main
ethnic groupings and also to overcome the problem of non-mutually
exclusive ethnic groups.
Generalising across the four multivariate models, younger age, not
being born in New Zealand, living in a family with children, living in a
deprived neighbourhood, and having poorer self-rated health all tended
to be moderate to strong predictors of changing ethnicity. Income and
education had modest independent associations only. Considering the four
ethnic multivariate models separately, that for NZ/European had
instances of varying associations; most notably, country of birth was
not associated with changing ethnicity.
Perhaps the key finding from the multivariate analyses was the
persistent and strong association of wave I ethnicity with subsequently
changing ethnicity. Allowing for the logistic model (i.e. odds ratios),
the association are broadly consistent with the results in Table 2 for
simple proportions. For example, identifying with two or more
self-identified ethnic groups at wave 1 is a consistently strong
predictor of subsequent change in ethnicity.
The model for a Maori-centric categorisation of ethnicity does,
however, highlight the fact that sole Maori have a 7.7 greater odds of
changing their self-identified ethnicity compared to non-Maori; sole
groupings for the other three ethnicities did not have increased odds of
changing ethnicity when compared with their counterpart "non"
ethnic group.
DISCUSSION
The aims of this paper were to explore and quantify the proportion
of people in the SoFIE population who change their self-identified
ethnicity over three years and to look at the socio-demographic factors
that predict this change. Overall, 8.1% of the SoFIE population changed
their level 1 ethnic group over the first three waves. Individuals who
changed ethnicity were more likely to be younger, to be born overseas
(for Pacific, Asian and Maori changes at least), to live in a family
with children, to be in more deprived groups, and to have poorer
self-rated health.
However, by far the biggest predictor of changing ethnicity in
waves 2 to 3 was one's ethnicity at wave 1--especially how many
ethnic groups one self-identified with. Over half of all people with two
or more ethnic groups at wave 1 had a change at the level 1 ethnic
coding over waves 2 to 3. Second, those self-identifying solely as Maori
had a 21.3% chance of changing their level 1 ethnic grouping in the
subsequent two waves. These baseline ethnic group predictions of
subsequent change in ethnic groupings persisted after adjustment for
other socio-demographic predictors.
Both census and birth registration data show that over time more
people have been identifying with multiple ethnic groups (Callister et
al. 2008). Dual or multiple ethnicities are particularly common among
Maori and Pacific people and, somewhat connected with this, among young
people. A number of New Zealand studies show that allocation of
ethnicity to babies and young children is not a straightforward process
and is influenced by a range of factors, including intermarriage of
parents (Callister 2003, Howard and Didham 2005, Kukutai 2007, 2008). We
cannot show whether multiple responses of young or older people
stabilise over time. However, we have shown in the current analyses that
the proportion of people responding with multiple ethnicity is declining
over time, with more people identifying with only one ethnic group. Some
reasons for this finding are that respondents are possibly
self-prioritising over time, or it could be due to just survey
exhaustion. It is our aim, with more years of SoFIE data, to investigate
if and how individuals' responses to self-identified ethnicity
stabilise over time and how changing social and economic circumstances
influence these.
The strengths of our analysis include the use of repeated measures
on the same individuals over time, and (most importantly) the use of the
same question, with both interviewer and interviewee blinded to the
responses at previous waves. Thus, our results are not driven by
questionnaire changes or defaulting to prior recorded ethnicity. Rather,
changes must be due to either a "conscious" decision on the
part of the respondent or unreliability of measurement. Simpson and
Akinwale (2007) have shown that unreliability in measurement may occur
due to errors of response, transcription or coding, or simply question
ambiguity (Simpson and Akinwale 2007). However, as mentioned previously,
stringent survey techniques used in SoFIE aim to control for these
errors.
One limitation is possible selection bias. Those SoFIE respondents
with data for all three waves represent 83% of the total eligible SoFIE
adult population at wave 1. It is plausible that changing ethnicity
varies in magnitude and pattern among non-responders. For example, it
was found that rates of attrition were higher in respondents reporting
Maori and Pacific ethnicity at wave 1 (Carter et al. 2008). In the SoFIE
population only 5% of respondents reported multiple ethnic affiliations,
which is much less than was found in the 2001 and 2006 census
populations aged 15 years and older (6.5% and 7.8%, respectively). As
shown in the results, Maori and Pacific people are more likely to report
multiple affiliations, and respondents with multiple affiliations were
more likely to change ethnicity over time. This could mean that the
current results are potentially underestimating the number of people
changing ethnicity due to non-response. These results may not be
generalisable to the NZ population, but they are internally valid due to
controlled questioning in the survey methods and analysis.
Another key limitation is the limited time of follow-up (three
years to date). Extra waves of observation (which are forthcoming) will
assist in two ways. First, they will allow a determination of changes
over the medium and long term as opposed to just three years. Second,
and perhaps more importantly, they will allow some determination of
"conscious" changes as opposed to "random"
fluctuations. For example, if we observe someone reporting sole Pacific
on the first two waves, then Pacific and European on all subsequent
waves, this enduring change may be interpreted as a more conscious
change than churn over time. With more waves of SoFIE data we will also
be able to investigate the influences that changes in social, economic
or health circumstances have on changes in self-identified ethnicity
over time.
There are many implications of our (and others') findings.
First, changing ethnicity is common. This does not mean it is
error-laden change and that ethnicity is a highly context-dependant
variable. Nor does it mean that ethnicity is a weaker social variable
because of its "volatility"; one only has to look at the stark
differences in social and health outcomes by ethnicity in New Zealand to
appreciate that, despite being a dynamic construct, it is also an
extremely powerful determinant of social inequalities.
Second, it is reasonable to hypothesise that just as people who are
sole Maori and sole European at any one point in time have more
divergent health status than those from the total Maori and total
European groups, so too health status may be even more divergent for
those who are constantly sole Maori or sole European. That is, just as
people with two or more ethnic groups have mortality rates in between
the two (or more) sole groupings, so those with changing ethnicity may
demonstrate intermediary health (and social) status.
Third, the finding in the multivariable analyses that neighbourhood
deprivation remains a strong predictor of changing ethnicity, but not
income or education, is intriguing. It is possible that the NZDep
variable may be acting as a partial proxy for living in environments
with greater heterogeneity in terms of the ethnicity of one's
neighbours and social contacts.
Fourth, and of direct relevance to health researchers, the finding
that a simple measure of self-rated health predicts changing ethnicity
over and above other socio-demographic factors is also intriguing--and a
little concerning. As social epidemiologists tracking health disparities
in New Zealand, we are often asked whether changing ethnic groupings
over time may "spuriously" give rise to changing ethnic
inequalities over time. Our answer to this challenge had been
"probably not", based on the fact that the 5-10% of people
changing ethnic groups between (say) censuses would have to have very
different health status from the stable 90-95% of people to greatly
distort the overall mortality rate (say) for the group in question (e.g.
Maori or Pacific). This logic still stands, but the results in this
paper suggest that those at risk of death (as reflected by poorer
self-rated health) may actually be more likely to change ethnic group
over time than those not at risk of dying. What does this mean for
current health statistics and health priorities?
These results raise questions about the future ethnic composition
of New Zealand. For example, are people who self-identify as both Maori
and European a distinct group from those who identify as only Maori or
only European? Who is the "New Zealander" group? These are
contentious, interesting and difficult issues, and not ones that this
research alone will answer. But this research will contribute to the
discussion by gaining some understanding of the dynamics over time.
Do the results of this paper reflect a true change in affiliation,
or a change in response due to the circumstances of the questionnaire,
the day of the week, or what happened last weekend? How can we be
certain that a person's ethnic identification today is going to be
the same as tomorrow or next year? Irrespective of the exact underlying
drivers for each individual change in ethnicity, the current results
demonstrate that ethnicity is dynamic, not static. This needs to be
understood in any demographic analysis or interpretation of ethnicity
data, and may also have an impact on research into ethnic inequalities
in health, for example. It provides challenges for measuring long-term
trends by ethnicity if the changes we expect or observe are small, and
therefore perhaps explained by varying characteristics of those
migrating into and out of various ethnic groups. Fluid reporting of
ethnicity requires further understanding and analysis, both
internationally and in New Zealand. SoFIE data provide a rich source for
such analysis in the future.
REFERENCES
Baldwin, K. (2008) "Nominated ethnicity changes of students
from secondary to tertiary education: Secondary to tertiary
transitions" Who Are We: Ethnicity and Identity Seminar, Statistics
New Zealand, Wellington.
Callister, P. (2003) "Maori/non-Maori ethnic
intermarriage" New Zealand Population Review, 29(2):89-105.
Callister, P., R. Didham and A. Kivi (2008) "Who are we?: The
conceptualisation and expression of ethnicity" Official Statistics
Research Series, 4:1-56.
Callister, P., R. Didham and D. Potter (2005) "Ethnic
intermarriage in New Zealand" Official Statistics Research Series,
1 : 1-73.
Carter, K., M. Hayward and K. Richardson (2008) SoFIE-Health
Baseline Report: Study Design and Associations of Social Factors and
Health in Waves 1 to 3: SoFIE-Health Report 2, University of Otago,
Wellington.
Coope, P. and A. Piesse (2000) 1991-1996 Intercensal Consistency
Study, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.
Fenton, S. (1999) Ethnicity: Racism. Class and Culture,
Basingstoke, Macmillan.
Guimond, E. (2006) "Ethnic mobility and the demographic growth
of Canada's aboriginal populations from 1986 to 1996" in A.
Belanger (ed.) Report on the Demographic Situation in Canada 1998-1999,
Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Howard, S. and R. Didham (2005) "Ethnic intermarriage and
ethnic transference amongst the Maori population" Official
Statistics Research Series. 1:1-23.
Jensen, J. (1988) Income Equivalences and the Estimation of Family
Expenditure on Children, Department of Social Welfare, Wellington.
Kukutai, T. (2007) "White mothers, brown children: Ethnic
identification of Maori-European children in New Zealand" Journal
of Marriage and Family, 69(5):1150-1161.
Kukutai, Y. (2008) Ethnic Self-Prioritisation of Dual and
Multi-Ethnic Youth in New Zealand. A Discussion Paper, Statistics New
Zealand, Wellington.
Salmond, C. and P. Crampton (2002) NZDep2001 Index of Deprivation,
University of Otago, Wellington.
Simpson, L. and B. Akinwale (2007) "Quantifying stability and
change in ethnic group" Journal of Official Statistics,
23(2):185-208.
Statistics New Zealand (2004) Report of the Review of the
Measurement of Ethnicity, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.
Statistics New Zealand (2007) QuickStats about Culture and
Identity: 2006 Census, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.
Kristie N Carter (1)
Michael Hayward
Tony Blakely
Caroline Shaw
Health Inequalities Research Programme
School of Medicine and Health Sciences
University of Otago
(1) Acknowledgements We would like to thank Paul Callister for his
review and comments on this paper. We would also like to thank the two
anonymous reviewers, who provided very helpful comments. SoFIE-Health is
primarily funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand as part
of the Health Inequalities Research Programme. Establishment funding was
also received from the University of Otago, Accident Compensation
Corporation of New Zealand (ACC), and the Alcohol Liquor Advisory
Council (ALAC).
Access to the data used in this study was provided by Statistics
New Zealand in a secure environment designed to give effect to the
confidentiality provisions of the Statistics Act 1975. The results in
this study and any errors contained therein are those of the author, not
Statistics New Zealand.
Correspondence All correspondence can be directed to Kristie
Carter, email:
[email protected]
(2) In 2008 research got underway on those students whose ethnicity
recorded in tertiary education differs from that recorded at school
(Baldwin 2008).
Table 1 Distribution of 17,625 SoFIE Respondents by "Sole" and
"Multiple" Ethnic Groups
Level 1 ethnic group Wave 1 Wave 2
N % N %
Everyone Total 17,625 17,625
Sole 16,640 94.4 16,735 94.9
Multiple 990 5.6 890 5.1
NZ/European Total * 14,660 83.2 14,655 83.1
Sole 13,765 93.9 13,845 94.5
Multiple ([dagger]) 895 6.1 810 5.5
Maori Total * 1,925 10.9 1,885 10.7
Sole 1,105 57.4 1,135 60.2
Multiple ([dagger]) 815 42.3 750 39.8
Pacific Total * 830 4.7 780 4.4
Sole 635 76.5 615 78.8
Multiple ([dagger]) 200 24.1 165 21.2
Asian Total * 940 5.3 940 5.3
Sole 845 89.9 865 92.0
Multiple ([dagger]) 95 10.1 80 8.5
Other Total * 320 1.8 305 1.7
Sole 280 87.5 270 88.5
Multiple ([dagger]) 40 12.5 30 9.8
Level 1 ethnic group Wave 3
N %
Everyone 17,625
16,760 95.1
865 4.9
NZ/European 14,630 83.0
13,855 94.7
780 5.3
Maori 1,835 10.4
1,130 61.6
705 38.4
Pacific 795 4.5
635 79.9
165 20.8
Asian 950 5.4
855 90.0
90 9.5
Other 315 1.8
285 90.5
30 9.5
* Total percentages are the proportional share of ethnic groups,
by wave.
([dagger]) Stated ethnic group plus at least one other level 1
ethnic group.
Table 2 Distribution of the number of respondents reporting any
change in ethnicity between waves 1 and 2 and waves 2 and 3, by
wave 1 measures of socio-demographic characteristics
Any change in ethnicity
Wave 1 N N %
Total 17,625 1,420 8.1
Sex
Male 8,075 645 8.0
Female 9,540 775 8.1
Age
15-24 2,510 305 12.2
25-34 2,820 295 10.5
35-44 3,770 350 9.3
45-54 3,235 245 7.6
55-64 2,510 130 5.2
65-74 1,670 75 4.5
75+ 1,110 30 2.7
Total ethnicity, wave 1
NZ/European 14,660 830 5.7
Maori 1,925 700 36.5
Pacific 830 190 22.9
Asian 940 145 15.4
Other 320 175 54.7
Ethnic-specific combinations, wave 1 *
Sole NZ/European 13,765 325 2.4
NZ Euro + other gp(s) 895 505 56.4
Non-NZ/European 2,965 595 20.1
Sole Maori 1,105 235 21.3
Maori + other gp(s) 815 465 57.1
Non-Maori 15,695 725 4.6
Sole Pacific 635 65 10.2
Pacific + other gp(s) 200 125 62.5
Non-Pacific 16,785 1,230 7.3
Sole Asian 845 85 10.1
Asian + other gp(s) 95 60 63.2
Non-Asian 16,675 1,280 7.7
Born in NZ
Yes 13,950 1,050 7.5
No 3,670 375 10.2
Marital status
Divorced, widowed, separated 2,995 195 6.5
Married 9,440 640 6.8
Never married 5,180 585 11.3
Std family type
Couple only 5,410 305 5.6
Couple with children 7,300 695 9.5
Sole parent 1,700 210 12.4
Not in a family nucleus 3,210 210 6.5
Household composition
One family 14,100 1,165 8.3
Other multi-person household 830 75 9.0
Two or more families 590 75 12.7
One-person house
Labour-force status
Employed 11,215 900 8.0
Not employed, looking 395 35 8.9
Not employed, not looking 6,010 485 8.1
Maximum education
Degree/higher 2,585 210 8.1
No qualification 4,145 330 8.0
Post-school vocational qual. 6,255 520 8.3
School qual. 4,630 360 7.8
Equiv. household income
Q1: low - < $21,078 2,315 260 11.2
Q2: $21,078 - < $34,010 4,130 345 8.4
Q3: $34,010 - < $49,379 3,520 295 8.4
Q4: $49,379 - < $72,280 3,645 255 7.0
Q5: $72,280 - high 4,005 265 6.6
NZDep
Q1 (least) 3,445 155 4.5
Q2 3,615 245 6.8
Q3 3,095 230 7.4
Q4 3,880 355 9.1
Q5 (most) 3,580 435 12.1
Self-rated health
Excellent 6,610 495 7.5
Very good 5,855 465 7.9
Good 3,645 325 8.9
Fair/poor 1,510 135 8.9
Table 3 Odds Ratios (95% Confidence Interval) of any Change in
Ethnicity across Waves 1 to 3 of SoFIE by Socio-demographics for
Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analyses
Wave 1 Univariate European
Sex
Male 1 1
Female 1.0 (0.9-1.1) 0.9 (0.8-1.1)
Age
15-24 1 1
25-44 0.8 (0.7-0.9) 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
45-64 0.5 (0.4-0.6) 0.8 (0.7-1.1)
65-74 0.3 (0.3-0.4) 0.7 (0.5-1.0)
75+ 0.2 (0.1-0.3) 0.6 (0.4-1.0)
Born in NZ
Yes 1 1
No 1.4 (1.2-1.6) 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
Legal marital status
Never married 1.8 (1.6-2.0) 1.1 (0.9-1.3)
Divorced, widowed 1.0 (0.8-1.1) 1.0 (0.8-1.3)
Married 1 1
Std family type
Couple only 1 1
Couple with children 1.7 (1.5-2.0) 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
Sole parent 2.3 (1.9-2.8) 0.9 (0.7-1.2)
Not in a family nucleus 1.2 (1.0-1.4) 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
Maximum education
Degree or higher 1 1
School qual. 1.0 (0.8-1.1) 0.8 (0.7-1.0)
Post-school qual. 1.0 (0.9-1.2) 1.1 (0.9-1.3)
No qualification 1.0 (0.8-1.2) 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
Labour-force status
Employed 1 1
Not employed, looking 1.2 (0.9-1.7) 0.7 (0.5-1.0)
Not employed, not
looking 1.0 (0.9-1.1) 1.0 (0.8-1.1)
Equiv. household
income
Q1: low - < $21,078 1.8 (1.5-2.1) 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
Q2: $21,078 - < $34,010 1.3 (1.1-1.5) 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
Q3: $34,010 - < $49,379 1.3 (1.1-1.5) 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
Q4: $49,379 - < $72,280 1.1 (0.9-1.3) 0.8 (0.7-1.0)
Q5: $72,280 - high 1 1
NZDep
Q1 (least) 1 1
2 1.6 (1.3-1.9) 1.3 (1.0-1.6)
Q3 1.7 (1.4-2.1) 1.1 (0.87-1.4)
Q4 2.1 (1.7-2.6) 1.2 (1.0-1.6)
Q5 (most) 2.9 (2.4-3.5) 10 (0.8-1.2)
Self-rated health
Excellent 1 1
Very good 1.1 (0.9-1.2) 1.1 (0.9-1.3)
Good 1.2 (1.0-1.4) 1.2 (1.0-1.5)
Fair/poor 1.2 (1.0-1.5) 1.4 (1.1-1.8)
Ethnic-specific combination groups at wave 1
Sole NZ/European 0.10 (0.08-0.11) 0.09 (0.08-0.09)
NZ Euro + other gp(s) 5.2 (4.4-6.1) 4.9 (4.1-5.9)
Non-NZ/European 1 1
Sole Maori 5.6 (4.7-6.6)
Maori + other gp(s) 27.4 (23.4-32.1)
Non-Maori 1
Sole Pacific 1.4 (1.1-1.9)
Pacific + other gp(s) 23.1 (17.2-31.2)
Non-Pacific 1
Sole Asian 1.33 (1.05-1.68)
Asian + other gp(s) 23.0 (14.9-35.4)
Non-Asian 1
Multivariate
Wave 1
Maori Pacific
Sex
Male 1 1
Female 0.9 (0.8-1.1) 1.0 (0.9-1.1)
Age
15-24 1 1
25-44 0.8 (0.7-1.0) 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
45-64 0.7 (0.5-0.9) 0.7 (0.5-0.8)
65-74 0.5 (0.3-0.8) 0.4 (0.3-0.6)
75+ 0.4 (0.2-0.6) 0.3 (0.2-0.4)
Born in NZ
Yes 1 1
No 3.5 (3.0-4.1) 1.5 (1.3-1 .7)
Legal marital status
Never married 1.0 (0.9-1.3) 1.4 (1.1-1.6)
Divorced, widowed 1.0 (0.8-1.2) 1.1 (0.9-1.4)
Married 1 1
Std family type
Couple only 1 1
Couple with children 1.2 (1.0-1.4) 1.3 (1.1-1.5)
Sole parent 1.0 (0.8-1.3) 1.2 (1.0-1.5)
Not in a family nucleus 1.0 (0.8-1.3) 0.8 (0.7-1.0)
Maximum education
Degree or higher 1 1
School qual. 0.8 (0.6-1.0) 0.8 (0.7-1.0)
Post-school qual. 0.9 (0.7-1.1) 1.0 (0.9-1.2)
No qualification 0.8 (0.6-1.0) 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
Labour-force status
Employed 1 1
Not employed, looking 0.7 (0.5-1.1) 0.8 (0.6-1.1)
Not employed, not
looking 1.0 (0.9-1.2) 1.0 (0.9-1.2)
Equiv. household
income
Q1: low - < $21,078 1.0 (0.8-1.3) 1.2 (1.0-1.5)
Q2: $21,078 - < $34,010 1.0 (0.8-1.2) 1.1 (0.9-1.4)
Q3: $34,010 - < $49,379 0.9 (0.8-1.2) 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
Q4: $49,379 - < $72,280 0.9 (0.7-1.1) 0.9 (0.8-1.1)
Q5: $72,280 - high 1 1
NZDep
Q1 (least) 1 1
2 1.4 (1.1-1.8) 1.4 (1.2-1.8)
Q3 1.4 (1.1-1.7) 1.6 (1.3-1.9)
Q4 1.6 (1.3-2.0) 1.8 (1.5-2.2)
Q5 (most) 1.4 (1.1-1.8) 2.3 (1.9-2.9)
Self-rated health
Excellent 1 1
Very good 1.1 (0.9-1.2) 1.2 (1.0-1.3)
Good 1.3 (1.1-1.5) 1.4 (1.2-1.6)
Fair/poor 1.4 (1.1-1.7) 1.5 (1.2-1.8)
Ethnic-specific combination groups at wave 1
Sole NZ/European
NZ Euro + other gp(s)
Non-NZ/European
Sole Maori 7.7 (6.3-9.3)
Maori + other gp(s) 37.7 (31.5-45.1)
Non-Maori 1
Sole Pacific 0.7 (0.6-1.0)
Pacific + other gp(s) 17.1 (12.6-23.2)
Non-Pacific 1
Sole Asian
Asian + other gp(s)
Non-Asian
Wave 1 Asian
Sex
Male 1
Female 1.0 (0.9-1.1)
Age
15-24 1
25-44 0.9 (0.7-1.0)
45-64 0.6 (0.5-0.8)
65-74 0.4 (0.3-0.6)
75+ 0.3 (0.2-0.4)
Born in NZ
Yes 1
No 1.4 (1.3-1.7)
Legal marital status
Never married 1.4 (1.1-1.6)
Divorced, widowed 1.1 (0.9-1.3)
Married 1
Std family type
Couple only 1
Couple with children 1.3 (1.1-1.5)
Sole parent 1.3 (1.1-1.6)
Not in a family nucleus 0.9 (0.7-1.1)
Maximum education
Degree or higher 1
School qual. 0.8 (0.6-0.9)
Post-school qual. 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
No qualification 0.9 (0.8-1.2)
Labour-force status
Employed 1
Not employed, looking 0.8 (0.6-1.2)
Not employed, not
looking 1.0 (0.9-1.1)
Equiv. household
income
Q1: low - < $21,078 1.2 (1.0-1.5)
Q2: $21,078 - < $34,010 1.1 (0.9-1.4)
Q3: $34,010 - < $49,379 1.0 (0.8-1.2)
Q4: $49,379 - < $72,280 0.9 (0.8-1.1)
Q5: $72,280 - high 1
NZDep
Q1 (least) 1
2 1.5 (1.2-1.9)
Q3 1.6 (1.3-2.0)
Q4 1.9 (1.5-2.3)
Q5 (most) 2.4 (2.0-3.0)
Self-rated health
Excellent 1
Very good 1.1 (1.0-1.3)
Good 1.4 (1.2-1.6)
Fair/poor 1.4 (1.2-1.8)
Ethnic-specific combination groups at wave 1
Sole NZ/European
NZ Euro + other gp(s)
Non-NZ/European
Sole Maori
Maori + other gp(s)
Non-Maori
Sole Pacific
Pacific + other gp(s)
Non-Pacific
Sole Asian 0.8 (0.6-1.1)
Asian + other gp(s) 17.4 (11.1-27.1)
Non-Asian 1
* Total ethnicity (not mutually exclusive).
Notes: Reference = not in that ethnic group. N = 17, 625.
