This recognition places our work at the forefront of the UK’s data transformation journey. As a multi-disciplinary research group, we bring together researchers and practitioners from academia, think-tanks, industry and government. Our mission is to improve how researchers work with sensitive data by developing cutting-edge tools and best practices for Trusted Research Environments – the secure digital spaces where crucial research affecting public policy takes place.
“We’re honoured that DRAGoN has been nominated for an ONS Research Excellence Award and shortlisted for the People’s Choice category,” says Elizabeth Green, Senior Lecturer in Economics. “These prestigious awards celebrate innovative research that creates public value through statistical excellence. Our nomination highlights the crucial work we do.”
The ONS Research Excellence Awards celebrate projects that push boundaries in statistical analysis and create lasting public benefit. Being shortlisted alongside fourteen other outstanding initiatives confirms our position as a leader in data research innovation.
Your Support Matters We would be grateful for your support through your vote in the People’s Choice category. Voting closes at midnight on Sunday 24 November. Every vote helps showcase our commitment to advancing secure and effective data research.
In support of contributing to an evidence base to aid the Labour Government’s key mission to promote regional economic growth and the creation of good jobs, a research team from the University of the West of England has analysed data created as part of the Wage and Employment Dynamics (WED) project to explore the unique characteristics of the West of England’s local labour market.
Background
This work was completed in support of the launch of the Futures West Foundation, which aims to establish evidence-based research and insights to tackle the West of England’s long-term challenges to raise productivity, prosperity and innovation. The report begins by providing a national context before focussing on the regional labour market of the Western Gateway Area (WGA) – the WGA includes Bath and North East Somerset, Bristol, North Somerset, South Gloucestershire, Gloucestershire, Swindon, and Wiltshire.
By utilising microdata from theAnnual Population Survey (APS) and the enriched Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE), researchers explored labour markets and wage trends by focussing on five key sectors: Advanced Manufacturing and Engineering, Finance and Insurance Services, Creative Industries, Digital Industries, and Environmental Goods and Services.
What we found – national perspective
The article reports the persistence of regional wage disparities with wages remaining highest in London and the South East, while the North East has the lowest average pay. Wage growth, however, was fairly consistent across all regions between the period of observation (2004-2022). The report also notes that during this time, the minimum wage has increased at a faster rate than the median wage, suggesting that lower-paid workers are gaining a larger share of overall earnings. This trend is helping to reduce wage inequality which is demonstrated by the fact that the percentage of workers earning below two-thirds of the national median wage dropping significantly since 2014.
What we found – regional perspective
The data revealed that workers in the WGA earned a wage which was approximately 4% higher than the national average (excluding Greater London), but this reduced to just over 2% after taking other characteristics into consideration. The report estimates that the priority sectors contributed around 7% of this pay premium.
The analysis revealed that this pay advantage is unevenly distributed across the region. The average wage in the West of England was about 11% higher than in Gloucestershire, while higher wages in West of England are primarily driven by jobs in the City of Bristol and South Gloucestershire. The analysis also revealed that employees in Wiltshire (excluding Swindon) earned less than the national comparator group.
At the sector level, the analysis showed that wages in each of the five identified priority sectors are significantly higher compared to other sectors – e.g. those working in the Advanced Manufacturing and Engineering and Digital industries sector earn approximately 6% and 12% more than the national average. This advantage is further heightened for those working in the Advanced Manufacturing and Engineering sector in the WGA, who earn around 1.6% more on average than their counterparts in the same sector across the country. Despite employees working in the Digital industries recording above average wages, this advantage is somewhat offset for those working in the WGA. The analysis revealed that Digital industries sector workers in the WGA earned around 3.1% less than the national average for the same sector. This discrepancy is likely to be due to the specific sub-sector composition in the region, but warrants further exploration.
This research highlights the value of using microdata, such as that provided by the WED project. Th use of microdata can enable researchers to provide deeper insights, allowing for effective and targeted policymaking. The findings of this report suggests that priority sectors identified by Futures West are important for boosting living standards and productivity across the WGA. This work therefore provides support for targeted sector approaches.
Damian Whittard is an Associate Professor in Economics and Programme Manager of the Wage and Employment Dynamics Project, where he leads a research programme creating a comprehensive labour market data spine for the UK. As an Academic Assessor for the Government Economic Service and Research Fellow funded by ADR UK, he specializes in economic measurement, labour markets, and green jobs research. His work has been presented at prestigious institutions including the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of England, and his research has influenced policy through projects with organizations such as the Open Data Institute and the Low Pay Commission. Drawing from his previous experience at the Office for National Statistics and the South West Regional Development Agency, Damian brings extensive expertise in national accounts, regional economics, and evidence-based policy making to his academic role.
In the last webinar of the season Abdinasir Kowdan and Orla Dunn will be presenting a talk on “How can councils enhance their utilisation of data for research, evaluation, and decision-making?” This engaging webinar promises to delve into the crucial role of data in informing decision-making processes within local councils.
Their research aims to explore strategies and best practices that can empower councils to leverage data more effectively, fostering evidence-based decision-making, robust evaluation, and impactful research initiatives. With their expertise and insights, this talk will undoubtedly shed light on the transformative potential of data-driven governance.
Whether you’re a researcher, a council member, or simply someone passionate about data-driven policymaking, this event is an excellent opportunity to broaden your understanding and gain valuable insights from this work.
Sign up now and get involved with the conversation.
The Spring 2024 DRAGoN Webinar Series continues to ignite curiosity and spark discussions with our upcoming session, “Thinking of data as an economic good: what it can (not) teach us about data governance.” Join us on April 9 at an earlier than usual time of 5pm for an insightful exploration by Nadya Purtova from Utrecht University and UWE’s Damien Whittard.
Speakers: Nadya Purtova (Utrecht University) and Damien Whittard
Seminar Focus: Discuss a unique perspective on data governance by viewing data through the lens of economics. Discover how considering data as an economic good can inform strategies for effective data management practices, and where it can also limit us.
Registration: Our webinars are free and open to any who are interested. To receive joining information, please register at this link.
Don’t miss out on our up and coming webinars that dive deep into crucial topics like – Data protection during war, governance of confidential research data, and effecting change in healthcare settings.
Be sure to sign up now to reserve your spot! Learn from and engage with subject matter experts on issues that impact us all, expand your knowledge and gain new perspectives and sign up to join in the webinars today. This blog post gives details and sign up links for each webinar.
The webinar schedule is as follows, and you can find out more about each webinar below.
Research and policy development on the governance of confidential research data is dominated by the work of academics and government agencies based in high-income countries (HICs). This leaves three quarters of the world’s population faced with a corpus of theory and good practiced guidelines which, although robust and well-established, makes little or no reference to the specific circumstances of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It may be that the data governance models developed in LMICS may be easily transferable to other contexts (there is some evidence, for example, that human-centred training adapts well), but in general there is little or no examination of this issue. There is however a large demand; a recent announcement of a training course in data governance for LMICS was 10x over-subscribed within the first two weeks of launch.
Following from this gap, DRAGoN has started a project on the governance of confidential data for research use in LMICs. DRAGoN hosted a symposium on data governance in LMICs aimed at building a network for discussion of solutions of data governance challenges in LMICs. The output of this symposium was presented at a UNECE conference in late September.
Additionally, this project includes a PhD thesis by Pedro Ferrer Breda, which consists of a case study of Mexico’s INEGI (national institute of statistics and geography) and INSP (national institute of public healthcare) to understand data access decisions in Mexico, supported by Natalia Eugenia Volkow Fernandez, INEGI’s director of microdata access.
This talk will describe this project’s current progress and explain future plans for the development of support networks for good governance of data for research use in LMICs.
Part of the team: Effecting change and sharing power in healthcare settings
In this talk, Dr Jessie Stanier and Dr Purtell discuss a recent paper from a project which explored perspectives from patients and researchers to rethink how patient stories were shared with executives at an NHS hospital trust. With a goal to develop a new narrative framework to help patients position themselves as part of the healthcare team, emphasizing shared roles and responsibilities between patients and practitioners.
Their talk will cover the outcomes of this collaborative project, including key support structures and obstacles. They will reflect on the significance of collective voice, accessibility, administrative support, and senior staff buy-in when working to truly integrate patient perspectives in healthcare systems, especially considering austerity measures and the COVID-19 pandemic and look at how their findings can influence relationships beyond those in the NHS.
The ADR UK funded Wage and Employment Dynamics (WED) initiative that aims to provide new insights into the dynamics of earnings and employment in Great Britain has made a new dataset available. Accredited researchers can apply to use the de-identified Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) – 2011 Census linked dataset from the Office for National Statistics(ONS) Secure Research Service.
Using the ASHE – 2011 Census linked dataset, researchers can explore how factors such as gender, ethnicity, disability and migration affect individual’s wage levels and pay progression. Access to this data will provide fresh insights into things such as the experiences of young people entering the labour market, job mobility, and career progression to retirement. This will enable policymakers to make better-informed decisions to improve the experiences of people in employment.
About the data
The ASHE dataset is an annual survey based on a 1% sample of employee jobs, drawn from the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) register, and conducted by the ONS. This de-identified dataset contains information on employees’ earnings, paid hours, occupation as well as a limited number of personal characteristics: gender, age, and residential location.
To expand the number of de-identified, personal characteristics that can be observed for employees, the ASHE dataset has been linked to the 2011 Census. The 2011 Census dataset includes characteristics such as educational and vocational qualifications, health, disability, and household circumstances for individuals in England and Wales.
The 2011 Census has been matched to all employees observed in ASHE in either 2010, 2011 or 2012. The ASHE – 2011 Census linked dataset therefore covers the period 1997-2020, but only includes individuals who were in 2011 Census and were able to be matched to individuals in either ASHE 2010, 2011 or 2012. It also includes some enhancements to the basic ASHE data, such as minimum wage rates and survey dates.
The linked ASHE – 2011 Census dataset allows researchers to examine pay and career progression of a cohort of individuals who were in employment around the time of the 2011 Census. This data is linked and made available under the provisions of the 2017 Digital Economy Act, which provides a legal gateway for researchers to access government data in a secure way. For more information about the linked dataset, see the ASHE – 2011 Census user guide.
Huge potential for this dataset
This dataset will help to fill a crucial evidence gap in information about the experiences of individuals in the labour market. Importantly, for example, ASHE – 2011 Census will enable researchers to understand the underlying causes of intersectional pay gaps and provide a deeper understanding of how demographic factors have informed labour market transitions.
The dataset could help answer a range of research questions to inform policy, such as:
How do personal characteristics such as household structure affect wage progression?
How does wage progression differ depending on characteristics such as gender, disability, or ethnicity?
What role do employers play in wage inequality?
What are the returns on investment from education?
What is the relationship between migration and the labour market?
Tim Butcher, Chief Economist, Low Pay Commission said,
“The WED project addresses weaknesses in our evidence base – improving the quality of longitudinal earnings data and extending coverage to a broader range of characteristics – that should enable researchers to give new and innovative insights into the wage and employment dynamics of the lowest paid.”
How to access the dataset
The ASHE – 2011 Census dataset is available from the ONS Secure Research Service. Access to the dataset is managed securely in line with the Five Safes framework. Accredited researchers can apply to access the data by submitting a project application. For more guidance on submitting project applications, visit the ONS Secure Research Service.
The ASHE – 2011 Census linked dataset was produced as a collaboration between ADR UK, the ONS and the Wage and Employment Dynamics project team. The project team is led by Professor Felix Ritchie and Damian Whittard of the University of the West of England, and involves partners from UCL, Bayes Business School, the University of Reading and National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
In August I spent a week in Australia working with the new Office of the National Data Commissioner (ONDC). The ONDC, set up at the beginning of July, is barely two months old but has been charged with the objective of getting a whole-of-government approach to data sharing ready for legislation early in 2019.
This is a mammoth undertaking, not least because the approach set out in the ONDC’s Issues Paper proposes a new way of regulating data management. Rather than the traditional approach of trying to specify in legislation exactly what may or may not be allowed, the ONDC is proposing a principles-based approach: this focuses on setting out the objectives of any data sharing and the appropriate mechanisms by which access is governed and regulated.
In this model, the function of legislation is to provide the ground rules for data sharing and management within which operational decisions can be made efficiently. This places the onus on data managers and those wanting to share data to ensure that their solutions are demonstrably ethical, fair, appropriate and sensible. On the other hand, it also frees up planners to respond to changing circumstances: new technologies, new demands, shifts in attitudes, the unexpected…
The broad idea of this is not completely novel. In recent years, the principles-based approach to data management in government has increasingly come to be seen as operational best practice, allowing as it does for flexibility and efficiency in response to local conditions. It has even been brought into some legislation, including the UK’s Digital Economy Act 2017 and the European General Data Protection Regulation. Finally, the monumental Australian Productivity Commission report of 2017 laid out much of the groundwork, by providing an authoritative evidence base and a detailed analysis of core concepts and options.
In pulling these strands together, the ONDC proposals move well beyond current legislation but into territory which is well supported by evidence. Because of the unfamiliarity with some of the concepts, the ONDC has been carrying out an extensive consultation, some of which I was able to observe and participate in.
A key proposal is to develop five ‘Data Sharing Principles’, based on the Five Safes framework (why, who, how, with what detail, with what outcomes) as the overarching structure. The Five Safes is the most widely used model for government data access but has only been used twice before to frame legislation, in the South Australia Public Sector (Data Sharing) Act 2016 and the UK Digital Economy Act 2017.
The most difficult issues facing the ONDC arise from the ‘why’ domain: what is the public benefit in sharing data and the concomitant risk to an individual’s privacy? How will ‘need-to-know’ for data detail be assessed? What are the mechanisms to prevent unauthorised on-sharing of data? How will shared data be managed over its lifecycle, including disposal? To what uses can shared data be put? Can data be shared for compliance purposes? How can proposals be challenged?
These are all good questions, but they are not new: any ethics or approvals board worth its salt asks similar questions, and would expect good answers before it allows data collection, sharing or analysis to proceed. A good ethics board also knows that this is not a checklist: ethical approval should be a constructive conversation to ensure a rock-solid understanding of what you’re trying to achieve and the risks you’re accepting to do so.
This is the also the crux of the principles-based approach being taken by the ONDC: it is not for the law to specify how things should be done, nor to specify what data sources can be shared. But the law does provide the mechanisms to ensure that any proposals put forward can be assessed against a clear purpose test around when data may and may not be shared and that appropriate safeguards are in place…
Finally, the law will require transparency; this has to be done in sunlight. A public body, using public money and resources for the public benefit, should be able to answer the hard questions in the public arena; otherwise, where is the accountability? The ONDC will require data sharing agreements to be publicly available, so people can see for what purpose (and with what associated protections) their data are being used.
To some, this need to justify activities on a case-by-case basis, rather than having a black-and-white yes/no rule, might seem like an extra burden. The aim of the consultation is to ensure that this isn’t the case. In fact, a transparent, multi-dimensional assessment is any project’s best friend: it provides critical input at the design stage and helps to spot gaps in planning or potential problems, as well as giving opponents a clear opportunity to raise objections.
Of course, even if the legislation is put in place, there is still no guarantee that it will turn out as planned. As I have written many times (for example in 2016), attitudes are what matter. The best legislation or regulation in the world can be derailed by individuals unwilling to accept the process. This is why the consultation process is so important. This is also why the ONDC has been charged with the broader role of changing the Australian public sector culture around data sharing, which tends to be risk-averse. The ONDC also has a role to build and maintain trust with the public through better engagement to hear their concerns.
From my perspective, this is a fascinating time. The ONDC’s proposals are bold but built on a solid foundation of evidence. In theory, they propose a ground-breaking way to offer a holy trinity of flexibility, accountability, and responsibility. If the legislation ultimately reflects the initial proposals, then I suspect many other governments will be beating a path to Australia’s door.
