10259 research outputs found
Sort by
Police Custody Staff Interviews: Metadata and Documentation, 2023-2024
No full textThe themes collected in this pack are taken from semi-structured interviews with police custody staff (Custody Officers, Detention Officers and Healthcare Professionals) as part of a broader project exploring the delivery of healthcare in police custody suites. The project aimed to investigate the interpersonal and interprofessional relationships between various kinds of staff working in police custody, alongside their relationships with detained persons. In addition, we aimed to explore the ways that the design of police custody suites enabled or inhibited relationships as well as the protection and security of detained persons personal data. As a result, the interviews asked police custody staff about their day-to-day work, their relationships with other members of staff and their experiences with detained persons.
The study explored two police force case studies, one in the North of England and one in the South. Staff contact details were provided by managers, who were then contacted and a time and date was arranged for an online interview. Interviewing then continued until saturation was achieved. Interviews lasted between 30mins and 2 hours. Interviews commenced September 2023 and completed February 2024Context
At present, there is no clear standard for healthcare provision in police station custody suites governing the level of care expected by those detained. Healthcare providers are expected to work within the standards outlined by their own professional bodies; however, these are vague, and no clear standard exists for detention staff, who perform most custody healthcare. This is troubling due to the high rate of persons in police custody with mental health and substance abuse concerns and the rate of deaths in custody; both these rates are unequally distributed along ethnicity lines. It also stands in contrast to other parts of the criminal justice system (for instance prisons), where an equivalence standard, i.e. an expectation that persons detained in prison will receive healthcare equivalent to those at liberty, is the norm.
There are two common explanations the absence of such a standard: police custody is a law enforcement space; and persons are only detained for a few hours, meaning that they can access traditional healthcare upon release. Traditionally, healthcare in police custody is understood as resolving emergencies (including sending those that cannot be treated in custody to hospital) and ensuring that detainees are fit to be interviewed. However, the high rate of persons who are detained during a mental health crisis, as well as the 'chaotic lifestyles' of those detained, means that the healthcare needs of detainees in police custody spaces are increasingly important.
Aims and Objectives
As a result of these changes, this project aims to develop knowledge about the healthcare practices of police custody staff (police officers, detention officers, and healthcare providers) in order to inform an equivalence standard and provide guidance for its implementation into custody work. The project will ask four key questions:
1) How do custody staff (police and healthcare) interact with detainees, and how do these interactions impact detainees' experiences of health and wellbeing in police custody? How do detainees' observable characteristics (age, body size, skin colour, gender) influence these interactions?
2) How do police and healthcare staff in custody interact with each other, and what is needed to achieve optimal multiagency working and deliver equivalence in healthcare?
3) What role does the age and space of police custody environments play in the delivery of healthcare?
4) What health information about detainees is accessed, recorded, managed, and shared within police custody; how is this done, and how is the information secured?
To answer these questions, we will carry out the following social science research methods:
- Up to 500 hours of observations in four police custody suites
- Semi-structured interviews with 60 custody staff and 40 detainees
- Audits of 1,600 police custody risk assessment files and interviews with 20 police custody desk sergeants about their risk assessment procedures
Potential Benefits
The chief outcome of the research will be a policy brief outlining what an equivalence standard in police custody would include and how it could be implemented. We expect that this will include advice on the interactions between detainees and staff (police, civilian, and healthcare), the forms of information that detainees receive and the ways in which they receive it. In addition, we also expect to comment on the interactions between staff in custody, especially as they discuss detainees across professional boundaries. For instance, the transfer of personal information about a detainee between staff should be highly confidential, and so we would introduce guidance on the handling of such information in order to maintain patient confidentiality. It is expected that the production of an equivalence standard that works with current custody suite practice will improve healthcare outcomes for those who attend police custody, while also reducing the potential for deaths in custody.</p
Co-Working Spaces and the Urban Ecosystem: The Future of Co-Working Post-COVID-19 (Metadata/Documentation), 2022
No full textCo-working spaces have become an essential part of the digital economy but how will Covid-19 affect their growth in urban areas?
This Round 1 Innovation Fund project followed the experiences of several co-working projects through the pandemic to explore what role co-working spaces might play in new flexible, hybrid models of work.
Research questions
How have co-working spaces responded to the COVID-19 crisis?
How do co-working spaces stand to be incorporated into the economic recovery and urban regeneration efforts in the aftermath?
Method
Over 40 interviews were conducted in Brighton, Bristol and Manchester with representatives from a range of coworking spaces and of local and regional government.
Key findings
The future of urban co-working spaces will be shaped by the wider dynamics of the urban property market and shifts in corporate demand for flexible workspace. These forces will likely prove more influential than anything specific to their founding organisation and social purpose.
The pandemic underscored the ambivalent position of co-working spaces as hosts rather than employers and revealed the variable positions of different co-working space business models in the face of disrupted income streams.
At the same time, co-working spaces have contributed to the recovery from the pandemic by providing places to work collaboratively or collectively alongside shifts towards more flexible work and working from home. In this respect their importance is likely to increase.
Attention is shifting from the towering dominance of London to smaller urban hubs and especially commuting towns.
Although local and national government are beginning to recognise the potential importance of co-working spaces, they have not begun to develop strategies to nurture them. This gap risks leaving co-working spaces and their users adrift in increasingly turbulent and competitive market conditions. This is especially important at a time where they stand to play a central role in providing sites for experimentation with, and adaptation to, new digitally-mediated working practices emerging from the pandemic, for a potentially much broader array of workers than spaces previously served.The Digital Futures at Work Research Centre (Dig.IT) will establish itself as an essential resource for those wanting to understand how new digital technologies are profoundly reshaping the world of work. Digitalisation is a topical feature of contemporary debate. For evangelists, technology offers new opportunities for those seeking work and increased flexibility and autonomy for those in work. More pessimistic visions, in contrast, see a future where jobs are either destroyed by robots or degraded through increasingly precarious contracts and computerised monitoring. Take Uber as an example: the company claims it is creating opportunities for self-employed entrepreneurs; while workers' groups increasingly challenge such claims through legal means to improve their rights at work.
While such positive and pessimistic scenarios abound of an increasingly fragmented, digitalised and flexible transformation of work across the globe, theoretical understanding of contemporary developments remains underdeveloped and systematic empirical analyses are lacking. We know, for example, that employers and governments are struggling to cope with and understand the pace and consequences of digital change, while individuals face new uncertainties over how to become and stay 'connected' in turbulent labour markets. Yet, we have no real understanding of what it means to be a 'connected worker' in an increasing 'connected' economy. Drawing resources from different academic fields of study, Dig.IT will provide an empirically innovative and international broad body of knowledge that will offer authoritative insights into the impact of digitalisation on the future of work.
The Dig.IT centre will be jointly led by the Universities of Sussex and Leeds, supported by leading experts from Aberdeen, Cambridge, Manchester and Monash Universities. Its core research programme will cover four broad-ranging research themes. Theme one will set the conceptual and quantitative base for the centre's activities. Theme two involves a large-scale survey of Employers' Digital Practices at Work. Theme three involves qualitative research on employers' and employees' experiences of digitalisation at work across 4 sectors (Creative industries, Business Services, Consumer Services, Public Services). Theme 4 examines how the disconnected attempt to reconnect, through Public Employment Services, the growth of new types of self-employment, platform work and workers' responses to building new forms of voice and representation in an international context. Specific projects include:
1. The Impact of Digitalisation on Work and Employment
-Conceptualising digital futures, historically, regionally and internationally
-Comparative regulation of digital employment
- Mapping regional and international trends of digital technology and work
2. Employers' Digital Practices at Work Survey
3. Employers' and employees' experiences of digital work across sectors
-Changing management processes and practices
-Workers' experiences of digital transformation
4. Reconnecting the disconnected: new channels of voice and representation
- displaced workers, job search and the public employment service
- self-employment, interest representation and voice
Dig.IT will establish a Data Observatory on digital futures at work to promote our findings through an interactive website, report on a series of methodological seminars and new experimental methods and deliver extensive outreach activities. It will act as a one-platform library of resources at the forefront of research on digital work and will establish itself as a focal point for decision-makers across the policy spectrum, connecting with industrial strategy, employment and welfare policy. It will also manage an Innovation Fund designed to fund novel research ideas, from across the academic community as they emerge over the life course of the centre.</p
Investigating the Barriers and Enablers to Data Sharing Behaviours: A Qualitative Registered Report: Interview Data, 2023
No full textThis data collections consists of 14 interview transcripts from a study investigating the barriers and enablers to data sharing. The study aimed to understand the barriers and enablers experienced by researchers across various disciplines. Participants were asked their experiences of and attitudes towards data sharing.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted in English during November and December 2023. Data were collected using a theoretically-informed 26-item interview schedule (COM-B model: Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour; TDF: Theoretical Domains Framework). Fourteen participants, across a range of career levels and disciplines, were recruited to take part in semi-structured interviews focused on data sharing behaviours and their influences.
Transcripts were analysed using thematic template analysis based on the COM-B constructs and TDF domains.
The transcripts are shared for transparency and to support secondary use
Bureaucratic Capacity, Slack Resources, and Political Control in the UK, 2010-2020
No full textRecent research suggests that bureaucratic responsiveness to political preferences may depend as much on organizational capacity as it does on incentive alignment, information recovery, and the strategic interaction of principal and agent. Better-resourced bureaucracies should be more able to comply with new political directions, irrespective of their willingness to do so. But because so much bureaucratic capacity is sunk into implementing the prior policy commitments of current and former principals, responding to new political signals will depend much more specifically on agents possessing adequate slack resources. This spare capacity should aid signal detection and program development; decrease hesitance at over-committing to new assignments in volatile environments; and provide resources for implementing changes whilst maintaining prior commitments.
Using two-way fixed-effects regression and a novel dataset of 1,430 legislative requests of the UK executive, we confirm that possession of slack resources specifically (rather than organizational capacity generally) significantly increases the likelihood of bureaucracies consenting to make program changes requested by parliament. Agents with slack also commit to more precise timelines for implementation. And survival analysis further reveals that, once committed, bureaucracies with more budgetary slack complete their assignments more expeditiously.
This collection consists of a curated dataset and R code to replicate the study on bureaucratic capacity, slack resources, and political control in the UK. The accompanying publication is listed under Related Resources
Understanding Society: Waves 1-15, 2009-2024: Special Licence Access, Census 2021 Rural-Urban Indicators
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.Understanding Society (the UK Household Longitudinal Study), which began in 2009, is conducted by the Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Essex, and the survey research organisations Verian Group (formerly Kantar Public) and NatCen. It builds on and incorporates, the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS), which began in 1991.This dataset contains Census 2021-defined rural-urban indicators for each wave of Understanding Society to date, and a household identification serial number for file matching to the main data. These data have more restrictive access conditions than those available under the standard End User Licence (see 'Access study data' for more information).
Please see the Geographical Lookup Tables and Main Survey User Guide Geography documents for further details of rural-urban indicators.</p
Living With Vulval Lichen Sclerosus: General Practice Survey, 2022-2023
No full textThis data collection contains anonymised results from a UK primary care patient survey on experiences of vulval lichen sclerosus (VLS) diagnosis and management.
The survey, developed from prior qualitative interviews and with patient representatives, was sent via 24 general practices in the West Midlands to people recorded as having a VLS diagnosis (n=177 respondents). It captures patient-reported diagnostic pathways (including misdiagnosis), access to and continuity of treatment, receipt of recommended first-line therapy (topical corticosteroids), follow-up and monitoring (including guideline-recommended check-ups), use of peer support, and the social impact and stigma associated with VLS.
Findings highlight gaps in care: around one in five respondents reported misdiagnosis, about one-third struggled to obtain treatment, only one-third received regular check-ups, and one-fifth were not using topical corticosteroids. Few respondents reported joining support groups, and many described concealing the condition, underscoring the need for improved awareness and education among primary care healthcare professionals and clearer patient information on ongoing treatment and review.Lichen sclerosus (LS) is a chronic skin condition which affects the skin around the genitals. This project is about vulval LS, which affects the skin around the outside of the vagina. LS causes intense itching and small painful cuts in the skin, and people with LS may feel embarrassed and alone. It can cause problems for normal activities such as going to the toilet, sitting or walking, and having sexual intercourse. LS is a lifelong condition - there is no cure. Treatment with steroid ointment usually helps reduce symptoms, but does not work for everyone. Some women may need surgery if they have a lot of scarring.
There is very little research about vulval LS. In 2018, researchers, patients, and health professionals determined the top priorities for LS research. They put 'Understanding the impact of LS on quality of life' in the top ten. In this study we will explore what it is like to have vulval LS, how people usually access diagnosis and care, and how it affects their quality of life. We will also explore the views of women with LS of issues related to future clinical trials on the topic. This is because in order to answer many of the priorities identified in 2018, clinical trials will be needed. However, we do not know whether women would take part, and what would be important to them in a clinical trial.
We will invite women with LS to take part in an interview about their experiences and views. We will give people the option of a telephone interview if they do not want to speak to a researcher face-to-face. We will invite women to focus groups to explore feelings about the current recommended treatment (putting steroid ointment on the affected area).
We will use the results from all of this to design a questionnaire for women with LS to answer. This means we will be able to ask lots of people the same questions, and that people who did not want to take part in an interview will be able to tell us about their experience. Questions will be about what areas of their life are affected by LS and how they accessed diagnosis and treatment.
We will also work with an artist to create artwork based on the research findings. At the end of the study, we will hold an event at which we display this artwork and hold a discussion between people with LS and healthcare professionals.
Four women with LS have joined a 'lay advisory group'. This group will meet several times during the research to give input into the study design, such as designing the interview questions, and helping us share the findings.</p
Annual Population Survey, October 2024 - September 2025
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Annual Population Survey (APS) is a major survey series, which aims to provide data that can produce reliable estimates at the local authority level. Key topics covered in the survey include education, employment, health and ethnicity. The APS comprises key variables from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), all its associated LFS boosts and the APS boost. The APS aims to provide enhanced annual data for England, covering a target sample of at least 510 economically active persons for each Unitary Authority (UA)/Local Authority District (LAD) and at least 450 in each Greater London Borough. In combination with local LFS boost samples, the survey provides estimates for a range of indicators down to Local Education Authority (LEA) level across the United Kingdom.For further detailed information about methodology, users should consult the Labour Force Survey User Guide, included with the APS documentation. For variable and value labelling and coding frames that are not included either in the data or in the current APS documentation, users are advised to consult the latest versions of the LFS User Guides, which are available from the ONS Labour Force Survey - User Guidance webpages.Occupation data for 2021 and 2022The ONS has identified an issue with the collection of some occupational data in 2021 and 2022 data files in a number of their surveys. While they estimate any impacts will be small overall, this will affect the accuracy of the breakdowns of some detailed (four-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)) occupations, and data derived from them. None of ONS' headline statistics, other than those directly sourced from occupational data, are affected and you can continue to rely on their accuracy. The affected datasets have now been updated. Further information can be found in the ONS article published on 11 July 2023: Revision of miscoded occupational data in the ONS Labour Force Survey, UK: January 2021 to September 2022APS Well-Being DatasetsFrom 2012-2015, the ONS published separate APS datasets aimed at providing initial estimates of subjective well-being, based on the Integrated Household Survey. In 2015 these were discontinued. A separate set of well-being variables and a corresponding weighting variable have been added to the April-March APS person datasets from A11M12 onwards. Further information on the transition can be found in the Personal well-being in the UK: 2015 to 2016 article on the ONS website.APS disability variablesOver time, there have been some updates to disability variables in the APS. An article explaining the quality assurance investigations on these variables that have been conducted so far is available on the ONS Methodology webpage. End User Licence and Secure Access APS dataUsers should note that there are two versions of each APS dataset. One is available under the standard End User Licence (EUL) agreement, and the other is a Secure Access version. The EUL version includes Government Office Region geography, banded age, 3-digit SOC and industry sector for main, second and last job. The Secure Access version contains more detailed variables relating to:
age: single year of age, year and month of birth, age completed full-time education and age obtained highest qualification, age of oldest dependent child and age of youngest dependent child
family unit and household: including a number of variables concerning the number of dependent children in the family according to their ages, relationship to head of household and relationship to head of family
nationality and country of origin
geography: including county, unitary/local authority, place of work, Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics 2 (NUTS2) and NUTS3 regions, and whether lives and works in same local authority district
health: including main health problem, and current and past health problems
education and apprenticeship: including numbers and subjects of various qualifications and variables concerning apprenticeships
industry: including industry, industry class and industry group for main, second and last job, and industry made redundant from
occupation: including 4-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) for main, second and last job and job made redundant from
system variables: including week number when interview took place and number of households at address
The Secure Access data have more restrictive access conditions than those made available under the standard EUL. Prospective users will need to gain ONS Accredited Researcher status, complete an extra application form and demonstrate to the data owners exactly why they need access to the additional variables. Users are strongly advised to first obtain the standard EUL version of the data to see if they are sufficient for their research requirements.Main Topics:Topics covered include: household composition and relationships, housing tenure, nationality, ethnicity and residential history, employment and training (including government schemes), workplace and location, job hunting, educational background and qualifications. Many of the variables included in the survey are the same as those in the LFS.<br
Action Towards Inclusion: Keyworker Perspectives on Employability Support for People Furthest from Employment, 2021-2022
No full textThis collection comprises 12 qualitative interview transcripts with employability “keyworkers” who provided support and interventions to individuals participating in a UK employment support programme that ran from 2017 to 2023.
Interviews were conducted between November 2021 and February 2022 and explore keyworkers’ roles, practices, and perspectives on supporting participants, particularly those experiencing mental health problems or mental distress, towards employment outcomes.
Topics covered include keyworkers’ professional backgrounds and day-to-day support processes; the employment-related challenges participants face; how participants describe and conceptualise mental health experiences (including the language used and perceived origins of difficulties); and whether contextual factors such as location (e.g., remote or urban settings) and digital exclusion affect participants’ wellbeing and engagement. Interviews also examine how participants encounter the welfare benefits system and the extent of keyworker involvement in welfare/benefits support, including the influence of Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) structures and requirements and any tensions between programme objectives and benefits processes.
Finally, the interviews elicit reflections and learning points, including what keyworkers perceive as most helpful for participants, what improvements are needed, and messages for service providers, keyworkers, and programme funders, as well as reflections on programme design and the implications of the programme ending in 2023.The ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health will bring about significant advancements in our understanding of how social, economic and cultural transformations affect mental health.
Mental health is a priority for governments and policy makers, in areas ranging from economic productivity to community cohesion and individual wellbeing. It is also intrinsically social: the factors that promote mental health or lead to mental health problems lie in our societies, our schools, our workplaces, our communities, and in the nature of our contemporary social lives. The impacts of social contexts, inequalities, and experiences on mental health differ by social group and vary geographically. We are living through a period of rapid and far-reaching change, in our environments (physical, social, virtual), social organisation (including issues around urbanisation, cohesion, exclusion, marginalisation and disadvantage), technological change (and its impact on relationships and employment), and social policy in the contexts of education, work and welfare.
Yet we do not know enough about which dimensions of our social, economic, cultural and personal lives affect our mental health, how, or by what means they might be modified. As such, we do not have evidence-based policies to address these challenges and to understand the nature and role of particular social and economic stressors on mental health, nor an understanding of the individual and social factors that enhance resilience.
The Centre will bring together expertise across social science, epidemiology, psychiatry, neuroscience, patient and public involvement, and policy analysis, to ask: What are the consequences for mental health, positive and negative, of major contemporary social transformations? What social, economic and health policies can support improvements in individual and community resilience to mental health problems?
We will pose, respond to and answer these and other key questions through coordinated programmes of theoretically-informed, empirically-evidenced, interdisciplinary research. These will be defined and delivered in partnership with affected communities, mental health service users, government departments, local authorities, schools and colleges, community organisations, mental health charities, and social and economic policy makers. We will collaborate with leading research groups working on these issues in other countries, and with existing UKRI-funded research infrastructure. We will evaluate existing interventions, apply novel concepts, and develop innovative methods for understanding the relationship between mental health and social experiences.
The Centre will carry out programmes of research across three key areas where social, cultural and economic transformations have produced substantial challenges, and which could benefit from intervention: 1) rising mental health problems among young people; 2) increasingly unequal rates of mental health problems in disadvantaged communities; and 3) the negative effects on mental health of changes in the security of work and the provision of welfare. For each, we will seek to understand mental health trajectories (how problems develop over the life course), ecologies (how social and material environments influence outcomes), and vulnerabilities and resiliencies (why some individuals and groups in adverse social contexts experience mental health problems while others do not).
Our research will identify the factors that amplify or attenuate the impact of social transformation on mental health, and the social, economic and health policies that can support mental health in individuals and populations. We will train a new generation of genuinely interdisciplinary social scientists equipped with the knowledge, the skills and commitments to help governments, policy makers and communities, not just to better support those with mental health problems, but to create mentally healthy societies for the future.</p
Next Steps: Sweep 9, 2022: Geographical Identifiers, 2021 Census Boundaries: Secure Access
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.Next Steps (also known as the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE1)) is a major longitudinal cohort study following a nationally representative group of around 16,000 who were in Year 9 attending state and independent schools in England in 2004, a cohort born in 1989-90.The first seven sweeps of the study were conducted annually (2004-2010) when the study was funded and managed by the Department for Education (DfE). The study mainly focused on the educational and early labour market experiences of young people.In 2015 Next Steps was restarted, under the management of the Centre for Longitudinal Studies (CLS) at the UCL Faculty of Education and Society (IOE) and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council. The Next Steps Age 25 survey was aimed at increasing the understanding of the lives of young adults growing up today and the transitions out of education and into early adult life.The Next Steps Age 32 Survey took place between April 2022 and September 2023 and is the ninth sweep of the study. The Age 32 Survey aimed to provide data for research and policy on the lives of this generation of adults in their early 30s. This sweep also collected information on many wider aspects of cohort members' lives including health and wellbeing, politics and social participation, identity and attitudes as well as capturing personality, resilience, working memory and financial literacy.2019 Web SurveyThe Next Steps 2019 Web Survey took place between August and September 2019, in between the Age 25 and Age 32 Surveys. It was conducted by CLS. CLS conducts annual 'keeping-in-touch' exercises in which Next Steps participants are asked to confirm or update their contact details. The 2019 Web Survey was conducted as part of the 2019 keeping-in-touch exercise. The data and documentation are available under SN 5545, and were added as part of the nineteenth edition .Next Steps survey data is also linked to the National Pupil Database (NPD), the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), the Individualised Learner Records (ILR) and the Student Loans Company (SLC).Polygenic IndicesPolygenic indices are available under Special Licence SN 9438. Derived summary scores have been created that combine the estimated effects of many different genes on a specific trait or characteristic, such as a person's risk of Alzheimer's disease, asthma, substance abuse, or mental health disorders, for example. These polygenic scores can be combined with existing survey data to offer a more nuanced understanding of how cohort members' outcomes may be shaped.There are now two separate studies that began under the LSYPE programme. The second study, Our Future (LSYPE2) (available at the UK Data Service under GN 2000110), began in 2013 and will track a sample of over 13,000 young people annually from ages 13/14 through to age 20.Further information about Next Steps may be found on the CLS website.Secure Access datasets:Secure Access versions of Next Steps have more restrictive access conditions than Safeguarded versions available under the standard Safeguarded Licence (see 'Access' section).Secure Access versions of the Next Steps include:sensitive variables from the questionnaire data for Sweeps 1-9. These are available under Secure Access SN 8656. National Pupil Database (NPD) linked data at Key Stages 2, 3, 4 and 5, England. These are available under SN 7104.Linked Individualised Learner Records learner and learning aims datasets for academic years 2005 to 2014, England. These are available under SN 8577.detailed geographic indicators for Sweep 1 and Sweep 8 (2001 Census Boundaries) are available under SN 8189, geographic indicators for Sweep 8 and 9 (2011 Census Boundaries) are available under SN 8190, and geographic indicators for Sweep 9 (2021 Census Boundaries) are available under SN 9337. The Sweep 1 geography file was previously held under SN 7104.Linked Health Administrative Datasets (Hospital Episode Statistics) for financial years 1997-2022 held under SN 8681.Linked Student Loans Company Records for years 2007-2021 held under SN 8848.When researchers are approved/accredited to access a Secure Access version of Next Steps, the Safeguarded (EUL) version of the study - Next Steps: Sweeps 1-9, 2004-2023 (SN 5545) - will be automatically provided alongside.Users are only allowed one of the three Geographical Identifiers Census Boundaries studies: SN 8189 (2001 Census Boundaries), SN 8190 (2011 Census Boundaries), or SN 9337 (2021 Census Boundaries).International Data Access Network (IDAN)These data are now available to researchers based outside the UK. Selected UKDS SecureLab/controlled datasets from the Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER) and the Centre for Longitudinal Studies (CLS) have been made available under the International Data Access Network (IDAN) scheme, via a Safe Room access point at one of the UKDS IDAN partners. Prospective users should read the UKDS SecureLab application guide for non-ONS data for researchers outside of the UK via Safe Room Remote Desktop Access. Further details about the IDAN scheme can be found on the UKDS International Data Access Network webpage and on the IDAN website.Main Topics:The Next Steps: Sweep 9, 2022: Geographical Identifiers, 2021 Census Boundaries: Secure Access data include the address at interview linked to:
CountryRegionDistrict/Local Authority April 2023Electoral Ward May 2023Westminster Parliamentary Constituency 2014Census Area Statistic Ward 2003Index of Multiple Deprivation Rank 2019Output Area 2021Lower Super Output Area 2021Middle Super Output Area 2021</ul
New Repertoires of Contention and Social Mobilisation: Shifting Dynamics of Civic Stratification and the Marketisation of Social Justice in the Energy Transition, 2023-2024
No full textThis project utilised comparative case studies in the United Kingdom and Australia to explore how new, technologically-enabled, transnational repertoires of social mobilisation contribute to the shifting dynamics of civic stratification in the age of uncertainty. It interrogated the relationship between the state, the market, individuals and civil society in the politics of the energy transition, specifically focusing on transitions from fossil fuels to sustainable post-carbon resources. Interviews were undertaken with activists in national and local campaign groups and local stakeholders in case study areas in Australia and the United Kingdom.WISERD celebrates its 10th anniversary this year. Over time it has grown into an international research institute that develops the next generation of research leaders. Our research brings together different disciplines (geographers, economists, sociologists, data scientists, political scientists) to address important issues for civil society at national and international levels. Our social science core provides a strong foundation for working with other disciplines including environmental science, engineering and medicine to transform our understanding and approaches to key areas of public concern. Our aim is to provide evidence that informs and changes policy and practice. This Centre will build on all previous WISERD research activities to undertake an ambitious new research programme. Our focus will be on the concept of civic stratification. This is a way of looking at divisions in society by focusing on the rights and obligations and practices of citizens and the role of civil society organisations in addressing inequalities in those rights and obligations. We will examine and analyse instances where people do not have the same rights as others (for example people who are migrants or refugees). We will also look at examples of people and groups working together within civil society to win new rights; this is referred to as civic expansion. Examples might include campaigns for animal rights or concerns about robots and Artificial Intelligence. We will investigate situations where people have the same rights but experience differences in their ability to access those rights; sometimes referred to as civic gain and civic loss (for example some people are better able to access legal services than others). Lastly, we will explore how individuals and groups come together to overcome deficits in their rights and citizenship; sometimes referred to as forms of civil repair. This might include ways in which people are looking at alternative forms of economic organisation, at local sustainability and at using new technologies (platforms and software) to organise and campaign for their rights. Our centre will deliver across four key areas of activity. First our research programme will focus on themes that address the different aspects of civic stratification. We will examine trends in polarization of economic, political and social rights, looking at how campaigns for rights are changing and undertaking case studies of attempts to repair the fabric of civil life. Second, we will extend and deepen our international and civil society research partnerships and networks and by doing so strengthen our foundations for developing further joint research in the future. Third, we will implement an exciting and accessible 'knowledge exchange' programme to enable our research and evidence to reach, involve and influence as many people as possible. Fourth, we will expand the capacity of social science research and nurture future research leaders. All our research projects will be jointly undertaken with key partners including civil society organisations, such as charities, and local communities. The research programme is broad and will include the collection of new data, the exploitation of existing data sources and linking existing sets of data. The data will range from local detailed studies to large cross-national comparisons. We will make the most of our skills and abilities to work with major RCUK research investments. We have an outstanding track record in maximising research impact, in applying a wide range of research methods to real world problems. This exciting and challenging research programme is based on a unique, long standing and supportive relationship between five core universities in Wales and our partnerships with universities and research institutes in the UK and internationally. It addresses priority areas identified by the ESRC and by governments and is informed by our continued close links with civil society organisations.</p