Abstract: The release in March/April 2023 of England and Wales 2021 Census complete data on “usual residents” by the Office for National Statistics provides an opportunity to analyze, understand and comment on the current geographic disposition of Anglo–Jewry. The analysis presented in this paper incorporates data from the 2001 and 2011 censuses, and makes use of a geodemographic assessment of Jewish communities developed from the 2011 census, setting the scene for changes which have taken place, particularly in the last 10 years. Estimates of the scale of births, deaths and net migration in the 2011–2021 period have been developed to explain why the changes in population have taken place. The potential impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the census results is also considered. A total of 26 sub-communities in the London and Manchester areas, together with 34 free-standing communities, each with more than 200 Jewish residents, have been analyzed in detail. Unexpected changes in Stamford Hill, Gateshead and Bristol are investigated. A total of 42 smaller communities (60–200 members) are also identified. The paper shows that an understanding of the socio-economic characteristic of each of the communities explains their changes in population since 2011, particularly when factors such as “meta-suburbanisation” in the London fringe area, the impact of student numbers in university towns, and special factors affecting Haredi areas are also taken into account. The picture presented is one of a stable (indeed slightly growing) overall population, but with a large variation in fortunes of the many communities which make up Anglo–Jewry.
Abstract: The Representative Council’s demographics officer analyses data to assist various bodies to plan for the
future needs of the Jewish community in Liverpool, Wirral, Chester, and adjoining areas. This year, the
investigation and analysis have been extended to include the Southport area, for the first time. We need to
estimate the numbers of people who might wish, now or in the future, to avail themselves of the services of
the community: Jewish educational and social facilities for children, synagogue provision, welfare and social
provision for adults, residential care and, ultimately, burial. The work of the demographics officer does NOT in
any way seek to identify our community by name; indeed almost all data sources used exclude any means of
identifying individuals. The approach adopted merely seeks to quantify our population by gender and age,
with some analysis of the geographic spread across our community area.
Abstract: The Representative Council’s demographics officer analyses data to assist various bodies to plan for the
future needs of the Jewish community in Liverpool, Wirral, Chester, and adjoining areas. These needs include
the scale of Jewish educational and social facilities for children, synagogue provision, welfare and social
provision for adults, residential care and, ultimately, burial needs. As with all Jewish demographic studies, the
question of who should be included arises. The government’s 2011 National Census used self-identification
as its definition of a member of a religion; for our purposes we ‘simply’ need to estimate the numbers of
people who might wish, now or in the future, to avail themselves of the services of the community – we might
call these ‘community affiliatable’ people, or simply ‘our community’. The work of the demographics officer
does NOT in any way seek to identify our community by name; indeed almost all data sources used exclude
any means of identifying individuals. The approach adopted merely seeks to quantify our population by
gender and age, with some analysis of the geographic spread across our community area.
The analysis falls into three elements:
An annual ‘snapshot’ of population elements - the main sources for which are data provided by the
shuls, the King David & Harold House Foundation, MJCC (on certain burials) and Greenbank Drive
Limited. My thanks to the administrators and honorary officers of those organisations for their
patience in completing the various forms.
An assessment of the current overall size and age breakdown of the community, which builds on the
‘snapshot’, and makes use of information from both the 2011 National Census, and our own local
census also undertaken in that year.
A projection of the future size and shape of the community.
Abstract: Population researchers have contributed to the debate on minority group distribution and disadvantage and social cohesion by providing objective analysis. A plethora of new distribution measurement techniques have been presented in recent years, but they have not provided sufficient explanatory power of underlying trajectories to inform ongoing political debate. Indeed, a focus on trying to summarise complex situations with readily understood measures may be misplaced. This paper takes an alternative approach and asks whether a more detailed analysis of individual and environmental characteristics is necessary if researchers are to continue to provide worthwhile input to policy development. Using England and Wales as a test bed, it looks at four small sub-populations (circa 250,000 at the turn of the century) – two based on ethnic grouping: Bangladeshi and Chinese; and two based on an under-researched area of cultural background, religion: Jews and Sikhs. Despite major differences in longevity of presence in the UK, age profile, socio-economic progress, and levels of inter-marriage, there are, at a national level, parallels in the distribution patterns and trajectories for three of the groups. However, heterogeneity between and within the groups mean that at a local level, these similarities are confounded. The paper concludes that complex interactions between natural change and migration, and between suburbanisation and a desire for group congregation, mean that explanations for the trajectory of distribution require examination of data at a detailed level, beyond the scope of index-based methods. Such analyses are necessary if researchers are to effectively contribute to future policy development.
Abstract: Internal migration plays a key role in shaping the demographic characteristics of areas. In this paper, data from the 2011 England and Wales census are used to assess the geographic patterns of migration for 4 small cultural groups that each constitute about 0.5% of the population—Arabs, Chinese, Jews, and Sikhs—with a White British “benchmark” group. It examines the sensitivity of the scale of intercommunity moves to distance, having controlled for other migrant characteristics, through the development of spatial interaction models. The analysis finds that, where a choice exists, Jews are more averse to making a longer move than other small groups, all of whom favour shorter moves than the White British. The paper also investigates the influence of origin location and socioeconomic characteristics on the choice of migration destination using multinomial logistic regression. It finds that the influence of student status, age, qualifications, and home tenure vary by group though a number of patterns are shared between groups. Finally, it probes the presence in these smaller groups of patterns found historically in the wider population, such as counter‐urbanisation. Overall, this paper broadens the understanding of minority group migration patterns by examining, for the first time, Arabs (identified separately only in the 2011 census) and 2 groups based on religion (Jews and Sikhs) and by revisiting, with new questions, the White British and Chinese groups using the latest census data.
Abstract: This thesis presents an investigation into the population geography of Jewish residents of England and Wales in the twenty-first century. The aims of the study are to understand the spatial distribution of the group; identify whether there are distinct differences between groupings in different parts of the country; identify whether the demographics and nature of these groups is changing over time; and to examine whether the pattern for Jews is similar to those for other minority groups of comparable size. Most importantly, the thesis theorises what the patterns found may mean for the demographic future of Anglo-Jewry. The results provide a clearer foundation for organisations responsible for the social welfare of Jewish groups in various parts of the country. In addition, as Jews have been present in Britain in significant numbers for longer than other minority groups, it provides useful insights into future trajectories for more-recently arrived groups. Thus, the findings provide an improved basis for policy formulation by the public authorities with wider responsibilities for combating disadvantage and improving social cohesion. Building on an understanding of the history of Jewish settlement in Britain, and existing demographic studies, the analysis presented takes advantage of the inclusion of a question on religion in the 2001 and 2011 censuses. The principal data sources are census outputs, including Special Migration Statistics, individual microdata, and the Longitudinal Study. The analysis investigates the heterogeneity of the group through the development of a novel geodemographic classification methodology that addresses weaknesses in other approaches and the particular needs of small, unevenly distributed sub-populations. It finds evidence of seven distinct classes, with a strong spatial clustering to their distribution. The spatial distribution of Anglo-Jewry is examined in the context of other minority groups, including previously under-studied Arabs and Sikhs; that analysis finds a strong commonality to the pattern for Jews and some other small groups – their trajectories demonstrating a tension between the benefits of group congregation (apparently driven by religion, even in sub-populations defined by ethnic group) and a desire for suburbanisation. It also identifies the strong impact of geographic scale when drawing conclusions based on distribution indices. The underlying drivers of internal migration, an important contributor to changes in spatial distribution, are examined using logistic regression, having first legitimated the use of (post-move) census-derived characteristics in migration analysis. The assessment finds a broad consistency in underlying determinants of migration and, for the Jewish group, an absence of a group penalty inhibiting the propensity to move home, present for other small groups. The patterns of recent internal migration are analysed using spatial interaction modelling and multi-nominal logistic regression; longer term (1971 onwards) patterns are also examined. Based on these analyses, and allowing for potential future patterns of births and longevity, population trends found through an innovative application of the 2011-based geodemographic analysis to 2001 census data are extrapolated to produce estimates of the Jewish population of England and Wales for future decades. The novel approach used takes account of group heterogeneity and absence of group-specific fertility and mortality data. The projection demonstrates an increasing Jewish population, in contrast to the reduction seen during the second half of the twentieth century, but with a growing proportion being found in strictly orthodox enclaves, which gives rise to a number of societal and policy implications.
Abstract: The Representative Council’s demographics officer analyses data to assist various bodies to plan for the
future needs of the Jewish community in Liverpool, Wirral, Chester, and adjoining areas. These needs include
the scale of Jewish educational and social facilities for children, synagogue provision, welfare and social
provision for adults, residential care and, ultimately, burial needs. As with all Jewish demographic studies, the
question of who should be included arises. The government’s 2011 National Census used self-identification
as its definition of a member of a religion; for our purposes we ‘simply’ need to estimate the numbers of
people who might, now or in the future, wish to avail themselves of the services of the community – we might
call these ‘community affiliatable’ people, or simply ‘our community’. The work of the demographics officer
does NOT in any way seek to identify our community by name; indeed almost all data sources used exclude
any means of identifying individuals. The approach adopted merely seeks to quantify our population by
gender and age, with some analysis of the geographic spread across our community area.
The analysis falls into three elements:
• An annual ‘snapshot’ of population elements - the main sources for which are data provided by the
shuls, the King David & Harold House Foundation, MJCC (on certain burials) and Greenbank Drive
Limited. My thanks to the administrators and honorary officers of those organisations for their
patience in completing the various forms.
• An assessment of the current overall size and age breakdown of the community, which builds on the
‘snapshot’, and makes use of information from both the 2011 National Census, and our own local
census also undertaken in that year.
• A projection of the future size and shape of the community. This is key to delivering the aims of the
work of the demographics officer, and is explained later in this report.
Abstract: The use of geodemographic analysis has a long history, arguably stretching back to Charles Booth's Descriptive Map of London's Poverty, produced in 1886 and the published classification of areas has invariably been based on all residents. The work described in this paper, however, is novel in the use of geodemographic analysis to focus on a single minority group within a national census. This paper describes the development of a methodology which allows geodemographic analysis to be applied to unevenly distributed minority sub-populations, overcoming two particular issues: finding a suitable geographic base to ensure data reliability; and developing a methodology to avoid known weaknesses in certain clustering techniques, specifically distortion caused by outlier cases and generation of sub-optimal local minimum solutions. The approach, which includes a visual element to final classification selection, has then been applied to establish the degree to which the Jewish population in an area is similar in character to, or differs from, Jews living in other areas of England and Wales, using data from the 2011 census. That group has been selected because of the maturity of its presence in Britain — study of this group may point the way for examination of other, more recently arrived, sub-populations. Previous studies have generally assumed homogeneity amongst ‘mainstream’ Jews and have not considered spatial variation, separating out only strictly orthodox enclaves. This paper demonstrates that there are indeed distinct socio-economic and demographic differences between Jewish groups in different areas, not fully attributable to the underlying mainstream social geography, whilst also identifying a strong degree of spatial clustering; it also establishes the practicality of applying geodemographic analysis to minority groups.
Abstract: Taking advantage of the availability of 2011 England and Wales census microdata, and recognising the importance of internal migration in shaping the size and nature of communities, this paper seeks to identify and quantify the underlying determinants of internal migration of small cultural groups. The Jewish group is one of the longest present minority groups in Britain. Three other groups (Arab, Chinese, and Sikh), which have been present in significant numbers for a much shorter period, are also examined. Multivariate binary logistic regression has been applied to data extracted from the 2011 safeguarded microdata files, to understand whether, having controlled for the variables identified, there remain residual unexplained differences between Jewish, other smaller group, and general migration levels. The study shows that the initial wide variation in migration propensity between these cultural groups is partly explained by compositional differences between groups, but that even after controlling for individual-level socio-demographic characteristics, regional location and distance of migration, cultural differences in migration behaviour remain. Overall, the study shows that there are fewer differences between Jewish and white British migration levels than for the other three groups, for whom a small but significant ‘cultural group penalty’, inhibiting migration propensity, remains.
