Thanks to all for the help with deciding what to put into these demographic snapshots, and as we start building them up I’ll create a dedicated page accessible through the sidebar where they can be perused at your nerdy leisure. These profiles won’t have much commentary attached – the point of this is to let the data speak for itself rather than have me waffle on about what is usually pretty obvious. So saying, if there’s any questions or whatnot, feel free to fire away.
Starting our run through the 150 Commonwealth Electoral Divisions, the first cab off the rank is the South Australian metro seat of Adelaide, which the AEC reckons looks a bit like this:
.
2007 Election Result and Two Party Preferred History
| Party | LP | ALP | GRN | NP | FFP | OTH |
| 07 Primary | 38.43 | 48.26 | 9.75 | 0 | 2.03 | 1.53 |
.
.
Age Profile, Family Composition, Housing and Migration
The final three categories in that last chart measure the proportion of the population that had the same address in 2001 as they did in 2006, the proportion of the population that moved location between 2001 and 2006 but moved locally (that is, moved houses within their Local Statistical Area – an ABS geographical category based on local government boundaries), and the proportion of the population that moved houses between 2001 and 2006, but moved from outside of their local area. Those last three stats gives us an idea of the size of the population growth/churn going on in a seat.
.
Income and Employment
Please note: Centrelink data is from 2008 and comes from the Dept of Human Services website.
All other data derives from the 2006 Census.
9 Comments
Nice work Possum – fascinating graphs – show pretty clearly the ways in which Adelaide differs from other electorates in SA and Australia – pretty much the typical inner city pattern – mobile, professional population, small proportion of young families but high proportion in 20s and early 30s, wide distribution of income – would be fascinating to compare against the seats of Sydney and Melbourne – my guess is that these same factors would exist but in even more extreme proportions….
Ta LO, those charts pretty much tell most of the demographic story of a seat.
By the time the next election comes around, I hope to have a few flash widgets running which will let people choose seats and metrics to compare using this data – but that’s a way off yet, about 149 seats + 4 weeks off yet
Speaking of which, your ideas in the last thread were great, but getting about 12 months ahead of where I’m actually at! The biggish regression models will come, probably panel data using the last few Census and elections and no doubt half a dozen Nerdy Sundays to refine – but that really is a while off yet!
Looking good possum
Weren’t we going to get NESB % as well?
Have now caf.
I’m surprised that ag/for/fish employed can account for almost 1% of employment in this area.
Strange when as far as I know there is none of that in or near [not any more anyway since the demise of market gardens in some adjacent areas] the electorate.
Maybe ex-farmers etc retired to the city still describing themselves as such?
that puzzled me too… only agriculture is the ag dept land just up the road that has a few sheep in from time to time, no fishing unless you count carp in the torrens… and only forestry is the tree lined avenues. Maybe all those garden centre employees? Unless Adelaide is an agforfish Schlafst:adte?
The data for industry employment derives from a crossmatch between the answers households gave on their employment (and their employer) and the data their employer provided to the ABS on their industry type. You can see the rather complicated way it all comes out over here (ABS census definitions)
http://tinyurl.com/8yppky
So even though there might not be much broad acre farming going on around the CBD of Adelaide, there would be a number of companies with offices there whose primary business is agriculture.