10259 research outputs found
Sort by
Labour Force Survey Five-Quarter Longitudinal Dataset, January 2023 - March, 2024
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.Background
The Labour Force Survey (LFS) is a unique source of information using international definitions of employment and unemployment and economic inactivity, together with a wide range of related topics such as occupation, training, hours of work and personal characteristics of household members aged 16 years and over. It is used to inform social, economic and employment policy. The LFS was first conducted biennially from 1973-1983. Between 1984 and 1991 the survey was carried out annually and consisted of a quarterly survey conducted throughout the year and a 'boost' survey in the spring quarter (data were then collected seasonally). From 1992 quarterly data were made available, with a quarterly sample size approximately equivalent to that of the previous annual data. The survey then became known as the Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS). From December 1994, data gathering for Northern Ireland moved to a full quarterly cycle to match the rest of the country, so the QLFS then covered the whole of the UK (though some additional annual Northern Ireland LFS datasets are also held at the UK Data Archive). Further information on the background to the QLFS may be found in the documentation.
Longitudinal data
The LFS retains each sample household for five consecutive quarters, with a fifth of the sample replaced each quarter. The main survey was designed to produce cross-sectional data, but the data on each individual have now been linked together to provide longitudinal information. The longitudinal data comprise two types of linked datasets, created using the weighting method to adjust for non-response bias. The two-quarter datasets link data from two consecutive waves, while the five-quarter datasets link across a whole year (for example January 2010 to March 2011 inclusive) and contain data from all five waves. A full series of longitudinal data has been produced, going back to winter 1992. Linking together records to create a longitudinal dimension can, for example, provide information on gross flows over time between different labour force categories (employed, unemployed and economically inactive). This will provide detail about people who have moved between the categories. Also, longitudinal information is useful in monitoring the effects of government policies and can be used to follow the subsequent activities and circumstances of people affected by specific policy initiatives, and to compare them with other groups in the population. There are however methodological problems which could distort the data resulting from this longitudinal linking. The ONS continues to research these issues and advises that the presentation of results should be carefully considered, and warnings should be included with outputs where necessary.
LFS Documentation
The documentation available from the Archive to accompany LFS datasets largely consists of the latest version of each user guide volume alongside the appropriate questionnaire for the year concerned. However, volumes are updated periodically by ONS, so users are advised to check the latest documents on the ONS Labour Force Survey - User Guidance pages before commencing analysis. This is especially important for users of older QLFS studies, where information and guidance in the user guide documents may have changed over time.Occupation data for 2021 and 2022 data filesThe 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. 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 2022.2022 WeightingThe population totals used for the latest LFS estimates use projected growth rates from Real Time Information (RTI) data for UK, EU and non-EU populations based on 2021 patterns. The total population used for the LFS therefore does not take into account any changes in migration, birth rates, death rates, and so on since June 2021, and hence levels estimates may be under- or over-estimating the true values and should be used with caution. Estimates of rates will, however, be robust.Main Topics:The five-quarter longitudinal datasets include a subset of the most commonly used variables from the Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS), covering the main areas of the survey
Home-Grown Growth (Dataset), 1960-2021
No full textThis research investigated the relationship between self-build housing and urban economies in four cities in Africa: Dar es Salaam and Ifakara in Tanzania, and Accra and Techiman in Ghana. The collection includes a questionnaire survey across all four cities and interview notes from Accra and Techiman. Interview notes are not provided for Dar es Salaam and Ifakara because they are ethnographic fieldnotes.
The questionnaire survey captures information about the housing career histories of 76 individuals in Dar es Salaam; 45 individuals in Ifakara; 41 individuals in Techiman; and 80 individuals in Accra. The questionnaire focussed on the nature of housing that people had lived in and how they had moved through housing stages (e.g. from tenant to owner) over the course of their lives. The sample was structured by five age categories (18-30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, 61+).
The interview notes include supplementary material to the questionnaire survey for Accra and Techiman in Ghana. They include interviews with people who ran businesses from their homes (Home-Based Businsesses) as well as people who ran businesses that supply the self-build housing sector.This research investigates what drives urbanisation in Ghana and Tanzania and how urbanisation contributes to employment and economic growth through a study of the economy of self-build housing in two established cities and two fast-growing towns.
Understanding what drives rapid urban growth is an urgent priority for African governments as they strive to ensure that housing, services and infrastructure keep pace with rising populations. Our project investigates how peoples’ desire to improve their lives by building better housing affects the growth of towns and cities and how the goods, services and assets generated through self-organised house-building contribute to the wider economy and urban change.
Most academic and policy work on self-built housing in the Global South has focused on negative impacts, including high density informal settlements where people live in extreme poverty. In much of Africa self-building is usual across all income groups and fuels the growth of all types of urban areas, from high-density informal settlements to better quality residential neighbourhoods developed by higher income residents. Over time self-build housing creates capital stock and income opportunities that provide a catalyst for residential and social mobility.
Accelerating urbanisation in established cities and small towns is driven by people acquiring plots of land and building houses gradually while renting space within them to lower income tenants and conducting businesses in and from housing. We will examine how this ‘housing economy’ operates in the absence of formal financial institutions, creating substantial opportunities for income, employment and asset generation which accelerate urban and economic growth.</p
Frames in Production, 1995-2020
No full textThis data collection comprises two Discourse Network Analysis (DNA) databases designed to study how political “frames” emerge and spread in real-world policy debates. Political actors rarely present issues neutrally: they highlight some aspects of a situation and downplay others, shaping how audiences interpret problems and what solutions seem appropriate. While a large body of scholarship explains which frames are persuasive, far less is known about the upstream question of where frames come from, who introduces them, under what conditions, and how they diffuse across actors and institutions over time.
The two databases provide structured, longitudinal evidence on framing dynamics by linking who says what to which framed interpretations and policy-relevant positions. Each database is built from text data and codes actor statements that contain at least one framing element as defined in classic work on framing: problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation. The coding makes it possible to reconstruct evolving discourse coalitions, track agreement and conflict among actors, and map diffusion pathways as frames move between parties, organizations, and other participants in the debate.
Because DNA integrates qualitative content analysis with quantitative social network analysis, the databases support both (1) exploratory descriptions of coalitions and influential actors (e.g., brokers, bridges, and central opinion leaders) and (2) statistical analyses of how actors’ statements connect to specific frames and policy choices across time. Substantively, the collection is suited for comparative work on framing across issue domains such as immigration, trade, environmental politics, global health, and transparency reforms, enabling researchers to investigate how framing strategies vary by topic and institutional setting.Political actors do not present issues objectively. They emphasise certain aspects and deemphasise others and influence the way the audience thinks about the issue, which is called a framing effect. A forest, for example, can be framed as a resource pool to be exploited, a source of artistic inspiration, a fragile and complex ecosystem, or a threat that must be tamed. Each of these alternative frames points to a different policy prescription. Moreover, not every frame is equally influential on its audience. Existing research demonstrates that emotionally compelling frames with negative information are especially effective in changing people's minds. In the recent decades, in most referendums relating to the European Union (EU), emotional arguments highlighting the risks of an increase in immigration played a significant role in persuading a segment of the public to vote against the EU treaty at hand. The importance of frames is evident in today's world. The ways actors frame issues are shown to matter in the fields of elections, immigration policy, environmental politics, trade negotiations, global health, transparency reforms and more.
Although frames have been studied extensively in fields such as political psychology, social movements, international relations or political communication, the main focus of the existing research is their persuasiveness, in other words the factors that affect their persuasiveness. This project asks a neglected question: Where do frames come from in the first place? Why do actors choose the specific frames they use? The project thus aims to create a new, comparative research agenda that investigates when and how specific statements emerge in a political debate, by which kinds of actors they are proposed, and whether and how they diffuse to others.
The project takes four steps in order to achieve its aim. In a first step, it uses a new methodological tool called Discourse Network Analysis (studying the content of arguments together with the networks of actors), in order to trace the emergence
of specific frames in a number of selected political debates, the most important actors involved in the process, and the diffusion networks involved. In a second step, it conducts interviews with these key actors involved in framing in order to investigate the most important factors determining their framing choices and whether their respective institutions have an impact on these choices. In a third step, the project studies whether and how these patterns vary from one issue area to another (trade, immigration, environment, global health, and transparency). As such, the project offers a comparative and
comprehensive answer to a crucial but overlooked theoretical question, with an innovative and mixed-method methodology.</p
Public Sector Management Practices Survey, 2023: Secure Access
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Public Sector Management Practices Survey (PSMPS), commissioned by HM Treasury as part of a Public Services Productivity Review, was based on the Management and Expectations Survey (MES). It aimed to collect intelligence on the use of structured management practices, technology use, administrative burdens, and barriers to improving organisational practices across publicly funded services.The dataset is in wide-format, where each row references a unique organisation and each column a characteristic or data-point associated with that organisation. Each organisation is classified to a part of the public sector, as well as region, employment size and SIC 2007 code. Survey answers are categorical data-points, stored numerically with categorical mappers provided, to allow numerical values to be converted to strings as required.Management practice scores are included for each level of aggregation: scoring question, section and total. Rounded designed post a-weights are included, and can be used to compile weighted survey results. This pilot survey was sent to ~ 14,500 legally defined public sector organisations. This meant organisations commonly considered as public-sector, such as General Practitioners were excluded.Outside the education and local-health sector, organisations were censused. Local healthcare units (hospitals, clinics etc) where threshold sampled based on employment. Educational organisations (schools) were randomly sampled, but also included a census component based on strata-specific features (size).As this is the first version of the survey, no variable was used to adjust the random sample component by variance of the target variable (management practice score).A total of 1,943 organisations responded to the voluntary survey, a response rate of 13.4%.Main Topics:The main topics of the Public Sector Management Practices Survey were:Organisational characteristicsManagement practicesImprovement and innovationAdministrationStaff retentionArtificial Intelligence and technologyEmployment relationsHealth sectorEducation</p
Environmental Risk Longitudinal Twin Study: Age-30 Follow-up, 2024
No full textThis follow-up aims to collect new data from twin participants of the Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study when they are 30 years old.
This nationally representative cohort of 2,232 same-sex twin children born in 1994-1995 across England and Wales, together with their 1,116 mothers, has previously been followed up through 5 successive waves to age 18 with 93% retention.
E-Risk spans the full socioeconomic spectrum: 900 young adults grew up in the most disadvantaged homes across England and Wales, 700 age peers are from comfortably-off backgrounds, and 600 from wealthier backgrounds.
At age 30, we will are comprehensively assessing via online video interviews the lives of these young adults (including human-capacity building behaviours, achievement of adult milestones, social relationships and behaviour, occupational and financial situation, mental health and substance use, victimisation exposure, physical health, social mobility), collecting blood samples via nurse home visits, buccal swabs via post, and linking to health, welfare, education, crime, social media, and geographical records.
This updated dataset will be made freely available and widely accessible to researchers across the UK and globally. It will provide a unique resource for conducting genetically informed investigations of how mental health problems, biological factors, social inequality and adversity in the first two decades of life shape variation in mental health, pace of aging, relationships/connectedness, future expectations/aspirations, and prosperity in the third decade of life.CONTEXT: The twenties are an important developmental period in which individuals traditionally become fully independent of their parents, complete their education, enter the workforce/housing-market, and develop stable relationships. How individuals navigate this early adulthood period will determine their health, well-being, and economic prosperity in mid-life. Unfortunately, the twenties are also the peak age for mental health problems, which can derail these key developmental tasks. The triple shocks of Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the transition to a Net Zero future have resulted in major societal changes and economic instability - we do not know how this will affect the mental health and prospects of young adults nor what will influence whether they falter or prosper. Therefore, we propose to assess young adults at the end of their twenties to capture the factors that may influence these different outcomes so that researchers and practitioners can explore how best to support the most vulnerable young adults to thrive in these unprecedented times, and ultimately influence policy.
AIMS: This infrastructure funding bid aims to collect new data from twin participants of the Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study when they are 30 years old. The three decades worth of comprehensive clinical-quality data, genetic and biological stress markers, and linked administrative records will then be made freely and widely accessible to the research community.
METHOD: We will capitalise upon the E-Risk Longitudinal Twin Study, a cohort of 2232 twins born in England and Wales in 1994-1995 who have completed extensive home-visit assessments (including on mental health, social experiences, deprivation, educational attainment, and provided biological samples) at 5, 7, 10, 12 and 18 years of age (when 93% of the twins were seen). This cohort is unique as study members are spread among poor (n=900), comfortably-off (n=700), and wealthier (n=600) families, allowing researchers to compare the outcomes of these groups. For this project we propose to collect new data on the twins when they are 30 years old in 2024-2025. This will involve remote assessments by trained researchers over Zoom on mental health, adverse life experiences, human-capital-building behaviours, social and economic outcomes, and potential protective factors. We will capture their quality of life and expectations about the future and social mobility via a tool developed by young adults with lived experience of mental health issues. A nurse will visit participants at home to collect a blood sample, and we will link data to their health, welfare, education, crime, social media, and geographical records. This updated dataset will be made freely available and widely accessible to researchers across the UK and globally. We will publicise this resource through webinars, journal papers, and websites, and create training videos to support researchers to access and use this data. Additionally, our young-adult advisors will produce a priority list of questions for researchers to answer with the E-Risk dataset.
BENEFITS: This project will provide a unique resource for researchers to conduct genetically informed investigations of how mental health problems, biological factors, social inequality and adversity in the first two decades of life shape variation in mental health, pace of aging, relationships/connectedness, trust, future expectations/aspirations, and prosperity in the third decade of life. Such research will provide important insights into which factors lead to young adults faltering or prospering in this period of social and economic turmoil. These insights are crucial to inform policy, practice, and societal responses to support young adults to thrive in these unprecedented times. Increasing the number of young adults who are mentally healthy and socially mobile in mid-life could ultimately boost the UK economy and reduce strain on the NHS.</p
The Micro-Dynamics of Agency, Metadata: 2021-2024
No full textOur research in Colombia, Lebanon, and Northern Ireland provides granular-level insights into how civilians endure ‘peace’. At the micro-level of individual interactions, people have to ‘get on with it’, putting food on the table, getting kids to school and sustaning daily tasks. This often occurs against a backdrop of continuing threats of violence, stigmatisaton and difficult economic circumstances. We have used daily pattern of life interviews, community mapping and visualisation, and walking interviews to try to capture individual strategies at the micro-level and understand how lives are lived where peace is either fragile or elusive. We spoke to over 350 civilians about their experiences and daily lives and this report sets out our principal findings and their policy implications.Approximately 2 billion people live in regions plagued by violent conflict (World Bank 2017); within a decade, half the global population will live in countries affected by violence and instability. A key factor shaping global insecurity is that the conventional means for bringing an end to armed conflict do not deliver sustainable peace: around 50% of peace settlements collapse within 10 years. Even when peace holds, its quality is often poor. Recidivism and poor-quality peace represent significant global security concerns, as pervasive post-accord political/criminal violence, poverty and exclusion continue to blight the lives of people living in fragile societies. Peace tends to reach conflict-affected communities slowly, if at all, and ordinary people must get on with living, providing for their families where jobs and state/government support are often absent. They must navigate complex, often traumatic relations between neighbours/authorities, where mutual distrust and discrimination and the legacies of war mean that people experience the present and imagine the future through the societal cleavages and violent memories of the past.
This research aims to understand how civilians face the challenges of failed/failing peace and how they navigate the causes, consequences and legacy of intergroup political violence when formal, top-down interventions do not reach them (RQ1). The project will create innovative original empirical and theoretical data and develop the concept of the Micro-Dynamics of Post-Conflict Intergroup Relations, describing the everyday tactical agency, mechanisms and narratives that individuals, communities and groups employ in order to cope with the legacy of political violence and learn to co-exist with or challenge their former 'enemies' (RQ2). The research will evaluate whether and, if so, how ordinary people play a role in sustaining peace when formal interventions do not reach them, or, if they do, generate limited effect (RQ3). Employing a cutting-edge participatory, co-production methodology of qualitative and quantitative methods, such as embedded ethnography, life histories, map-making, walking, photography, Nvivo, the project will develop a systematic evidence base of everyday tactics and strategies and the factors that shape civilians' ability to craft them. The project explores how factors such as inequality, economic/political exclusion and criminal/political violence affect civilian capacity to levy everyday micro-practices and their subsequent influence upon peacebuilding, intergroup coexistence and reconciliation. Given our focus upon local knowledge and everyday tactics/strategies, 3 country Partners and community stakeholders will participate from the outset through planned and costed activities and strategies to develop a robust theoretical model informed by stakeholders themselves. This model will advance theoretical insights by developing innovative concepts, such as post-accord civilian social entrepreneurship and individual and intergroup micro-social contracts, significantly advancing scholarship and leading to academic impact. Through Knowledge Exchange (KE) with funded direct Partners and wider networks of policymakers and scholars, we will contribute substantially to policy/practitioner knowledge of the factors shaping the stability of political settlements, the likelihood of recidivism and the quality of peace. Working with Partners, PolicyBristol and Durham Policy Hub, we will organise learning events, disseminating evidence-based knowledge of how local actors can sustain or challenge peace from below. We thus expect to facilitate considerable economic/societal impact through KE and lessons learned with peacebuilding/development practitioners. As an integrated whole then, the research will yield academic and economic/societal impact, ultimately reframing key debates, strengthening local capacities, building policy-relevant conceptual models and shaping policy and practice</p
Qualitative Expansion of Public Perceptions of Climate Change and Personal Experience of Flooding Data, 2014-2015
No full textThis data is an expansion of a previous dataset also archived within the UK Data Archive published by Pidgeon et al (2016) and available here 10.5255/UKDA-SN-851835 The data was collected to examine people's responses to the flooding events that impacted the UK in the winter of 2013/2014. The dataset contains data from a nationally representative UK sample plus a sample from areas affected by the flooding (Total N = 1997). The survey assessed climate change beliefs, flooding experience, and perceptions of the flooding. This dataset contains all concepts previously listed but adds two new variables: reasons provided for emotional responses to climate change coded into categories, and interrater agreement for codes provided.Flooding is an ongoing and predicted impact of climate change in many parts of the world. Previous research shows that many people who have experienced flooding exhibit a greater preparedness to act on climate change, especially when the experience relates to more pronounced emotional responses. However, this research has mainly focused on general negative emotional reactions to flooding. Here, we re-analysed a large UK survey dataset (N = 1997) to examine discrete emotional responses to flooding. We used thematic analysis to identify reasons expressed for emotions described in response to flooding.</p
Trade Unions, Grass Roots Activism and Solidarity, 2022-2023
No full textThis project investigated the impact of privatisation and social partnership on the labour process and trade union organizing, using the Royal Mail and the Communication Workers Union as a case study. In-depth one-to-one interviews were conducted with postal workers and local and regional trade union representatives across Wales during the strike period from August 2022 to June 2023. Follow up interviews were conducted with Communication Workers Union representatives following the cessation of the strike and the signing of the agreement during the summer of 2023.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
Scottish House Condition Survey, 2022
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The Scottish House Condition Survey (SHCS) is the largest single housing research project in Scotland, and the only national survey to look at the physical condition of Scotland's homes as well as the experiences of householders. The survey started in 1991 and became continuous in 2003-04. From 2012 onwards, the survey was incorporated within the Scottish Household Survey and became one of its modules.
The SHCS consists of an interview with householders and a physical inspection of the dwellings they occupy, which provides a picture of Scotland's occupied housing stock. It covers all types of households and dwellings across the country - whether owned or rented, flats or houses. The physical data about the dwelling is recorded by surveyors trained to collect detailed information on housing characteristics. This is combined with information about the household collected through the face-to-face interview. The result is a unique and powerful dataset for examining the condition and characteristics of Scotland's housing stock alongside the views and experiences of the people living in those dwellings.
Further information about the survey series and links to publications can be found on the Scottish Government's Scottish House Condition Survey web pages.</p
Longitudinal Study of Young Persons in England 2, 2013-2021: Secure Access
No full textAbstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Second Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE2), known to participants as Our Future, is a major longitudinal study following the lives and experiences of young people through their transition from compulsory education to post-16 routes. It began in 2013 and follows a nationally representative cohort who were aged 13/14 (Year 9) at the time of the first wave. The study tracks their transitions through education, training, employment, and other life domains up to age 21/22. To date, nine waves of data have been collected.LSYPE2 builds on the original LSYPE (Next Steps). It retains many of the same questions and methodological features to allow for cross-cohort comparisons, while also reflecting contemporary policy and social contexts. The study aims to provide a strategic evidence base on young people’s experiences, aspirations, and outcomes, with a focus on education, health, relationships, employment, and social participation.In Waves 1-3, data were collected from both young people and their parents, enabling analysis of family background and socio-economic influences. From Wave 4 onwards, interviews were conducted with young people only, using a mixed-mode approach (web, telephone, and face-to-face). The study also captured the impact of COVID-19 on young people's lives in later waves.The sample was drawn using a two-stage design, first selecting schools, then pupils. It also includes boosts for young people eligible for free school meals and those with special educational needs. Consent was obtained to link survey responses with administrative data from sources such as the National Pupil Database, HMRC, DWP, and Individualised Learner Records, enhancing the analytical potential of the dataset.Main Topics:The Second Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE2) provides rich, multi-dimensional data on the lives of young people as they transition from compulsory education into adulthood. The dataset covers a broad range of subject areas, enabling analysis across key domains of youth development and social policy.
Key areas of subject coverage include:
Education and Learning: School experiences, academic attainment, attitudes toward education, post-16 choices, and participation in further and higher education or training (e.g., apprenticeships).Employment and Economic Activity: Transitions into the labour market, job search behaviour, employment status, and early career experiences.Health and Wellbeing: Physical and mental health, health behaviours (e.g., smoking, alcohol use), and access to health services.Family and Household Context: Parental background, household composition, socio-economic status, and parental involvement in education (Waves 1-3).Social Relationships and Participation: Peer relationships, romantic relationships, civic engagement, volunteering, and use of leisure time.Aspirations and Attitudes: Future goals, perceptions of success, and attitudes toward work, education, and society.COVID-19 Impact: Disruption to education, employment, and wellbeing during the pandemic (captured in later waves).
This comprehensive coverage allows researchers and policymakers to explore the interplay between personal, familial, and structural factors shaping young people’s life trajectories.</p