Statistics Denmark

Measuring Discrimination in a Register-based Statistical System

Annemette Lindhart Olsen and Kirsten Wismer
Statistics Denmark

Session on the future of Social Statistics

IAOS 2006 Conference

Introduction
Discrimination is up for discussion in Europe. Directives on discrimination on the grounds of
gender have been enacted since 1957, and in 2000 two new acts on discrimination were enacted
to prevent people from being discriminated against on the grounds of racial and ethnic origin and
on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.

Defining discrimination
But what is discrimination? Objective discrimination is about unjustifiable differences in
outcomes while subjective discrimination is the experience of discrimination. The existence of
objective discrimination cannot be established on the basis of experienced discrimination, even
though subjective and objective discrimination often will be present at the same time. The
existence and level of subjective discrimination among different groups in a society can be
measured via questionnaires and interviews and by studying the court cases on discrimination.
However, the experience and awareness of discrimination can be stronger for some people than
others in the same situation, and the level of experienced discrimination might not reflect the
extent of discrimination to which different groups are exposed in a society. It is also difficult to
legislate on the basis of experienced discrimination, since it does not establish the existence of
discrimination. In this paper, we will focus on objective discrimination.

Objective discrimination
The two EU directives on discrimination, Race Equality and Employment Equality directives
cover only objective discrimination, which is divided by direct and indirect discrimination:

− direct discrimination shall be taken to occur where one person is treated less favourably
than another is, has been or would be treated in a comparable situation on the grounds of
racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation and;
− indirect discrimination shall be taken to occur where an apparently neutral provision,
criterion or practice would put persons of a racial or ethnic origin or persons having a
particular religion or belief, a particular disability, a particular age, or a particular sexual
orientation at a particular disadvantage compared with other persons.

c:\documents and settings\mccajam\desktop\fiels tojlasdjfkjasdfasd\kirsten wismer.doc

An example of direct discrimination in the labour market is, e.g. if a job advertisement in Den-
mark stated that only persons born in Denmark would be taken into consideration for the job.
Similarly an example of indirect discrimination is, e.g. if the requirements for fluency in Danish
were at a higher level than actually needed to perform the job. Another example of indirect
discrimination is, if persons in comparable positions with the same level of qualifications have
substantially different wages. It is worth noting that neither the concept of direct nor of indirect
discrimination implies the intention of discrimination.

The EU legislation concerns direct and indirect discrimination and once discrimination in a new
specific area is established, it can be legislated against. Since direct discrimination is more
obvious, it is easier to legislate against. In democratic societies, where discrimination is unlawful,
indirect discrimination is probably more often the case, when we speak of discrimination. This is
the case when persons with the same level of qualifications do not have similar opportunities for
promotions, because of their gender or ethnic background, even though employers are not
explicitly intending to discriminate.

Discrimination limits opportunities of people for improving the quality of life, and at worst starts
off a spiral of negative social heritage. Discrimination can occur in all areas of life, as well as
discrimination in one area of life can lead to discrimination in other areas of life, during a lifetime
and across generations. If ethnic minorities have been systematically placed in low-quality
primary schools, their chances of completing a higher education are reduced. This will affect both
their access to the labour market as well as the level of employment. When becoming parents,
their poor educational attainments can also have an influence on their capability of supporting
their own children in the primary school, and the discrimination of one generation will thereby
rub off on the next. Even if an ethnic minority is not being directly discriminated, and attend the
same schools as the rest of the population, the primary schools simply might not be adjusted to
the special needs of bilingual children, and thereby leaving them worse off than the rest of the
population with all that is involved in this. The impact of direct and indirect discrimination is
somehow indistinguishable, whereas it is harder to establish the existence of indirect
discrimination than direct discrimination.

To sum up, objective discrimination is when someone is unjustifiably being treated less
favourably than others in a comparable situation, or persons in comparable different situations are
unjustifiably being treated similarly. Objective discrimination can be caused both by direct and
indirect discrimination. In this paper we will focus on measuring differences in outcomes, as the
differences can be possible indicators of objective discrimination – and probably more often of
indirect than direct discrimination.

Why measure discrimination?

Establishing the existence of discrimination and identifying the persons or groups, which are ex-
posed to discrimination is a basic requirement for combating discrimination. Firstly, establishing
the existence of discrimination and understanding the mechanisms of both direct and indirect dis-
crimination is necessary to change practices and legislations which maintain minority groups in
disadvantaged life situations. Secondly, monitoring unjustified differences in outcomes at
national and international level is a means both to compare levels of discrimination between
nations as well as studying the results of the measures taken to combat discrimination.

2
Court cases on complaints of discrimination can give some indication as to what types of
discrimination exist and information on which minority groups the plaintiffs represent. But it is
difficult to establish indirect discrimination via the judicial system, as well as establishing the
levels and impacts of indirect discrimination. In the Race Equality and Employment Equality
Directives (preamble 15) the EU nations are encouraged to establish in particular indirect
discrimination by any means, including statistical evidence.

Defining disadvantaged groups

International comparable data on discrimination is also an aim in the process of combating dis-
crimination. However, this may be difficult. Nations have different histories as to groups, which
are at a risk of being discriminated against as well as areas of discrimination. This should be
considered when comparing levels of discrimination internationally.

When focusing on grounds for discrimination with respect to gender and age, it is fairly simple to
define the so called risk-groups since all people have a certain age and a certain gender. Groups at
risk of being discriminated will differ, depending on domains. When focus is on pay differentials,
women are often seen as the discriminated part, in most age groups. When focus is on primary
education in Denmark, it is the other way around, and boys are often seen as being at the risk of
discrimination, due to the school structures which favour stages of development of girls.

But when we focus on discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin, it is more complex
to define the groups at risk. It should be noted that the Racial Equality Directive specifies that the
European Union rejects theories which attempt to determine the existence of separate human
races. The use of the term “racial origin” in the directive does not imply an acceptance of such
theories. Among most social scientists today, the note of racial or ethnic origin is considered as a
social construct. The racial or ethnic belonging can be derived both from the persons’ own feeling
of belonging to a certain group, due characteristics such as religion, cultural traditions, diet, dress,
skin and hair colour and national origin, as well as from the observers’ classification of persons
due to these physical and cultural characteristics. The persons’ own feeling of belonging can vary
according to different and changing life situations, and according to the circumstances in which
the belonging is expressed. The classification of the observers can also vary for the same person,
according to the circumstances for which the classifications are needed.

In register-based societies, like Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark, ethnic belonging
is defined via parents and own country of birth as well as nationality, and not by self-declaration,
see annex 1. But the administrative registers do not give any knowledge on national minorities,
neither within the country itself nor in the immigrant countries. As the Scandinavian countries
have a shorter historic span of major immigration, compared to most other European countries,
this method for defining risk groups is still very useful, since most of the persons at risk of being
discriminated, are still considered to be the new immigrants and their descendants. The overall
purpose of measuring racial and ethnic discrimination is to combat discrimination through better
knowledge, and as such, we will have to do with a generalised picture on discrimination in the
nations. Over time however, when risk groups might not mainly be immigrants and their
descendants, the register-based societies will have to alter the methods of defining the risk
groups.

Censuses are the most frequently used method of collecting personal data on the populations in
countries outside of Scandinavia and the Netherlands. Censuses allow for self-declaration of
racial and ethnic belonging, and data can as such reflect the persons’ own notions of ethnic

3
belonging. At “The Conference of European Statisticians – recommendations for 2010 censuses
of population and housing”, it is recommended that data on ethno-cultural characteristics should
be based on free and open self-declaration, since ethno-cultural characteristics generally have a
subjective dimension. Especially in countries with a longer history of immigration, and as such,
where the ethnic groups at risk are not immigrants but national minorities, like Roma’s in Eastern
and Southern Europe, self-declaration will be a better method for defining ethnic belonging than
national origin. Self-declaration also has its flaws, since especially ethnic minorities might choose
not to express their belonging to this ethnic group in a survey conducted by the state, as they have
a history of being severely suppressed by the state.

When comparing data on racial and ethnic discrimination internationally, it is necessary to accept
that different data systems and different histories on discrimination will require different methods
for defining risk groups, and that the extent of discrimination shall be compared with
considerations of the differences.

How can we measure discrimination?

As described above, the discriminatory impact can be the accumulated effect of minor
discrimination in several areas of life, during a life course and from one generation to the next.
Measuring discrimination can, therefore, not be carried out by using only one single method, at
one point-in-time or by focusing on one domain in life. The Panel on Methods for Assessing
Discrimination recommends major longitudinal surveys, and studies of cumulative disadvantage
across time, domains, generations and population groups, as well as including questions in new
longitudinal surveys that would help researchers identify experiences of discrimination and their
effects1.

Denmark as a register country has a monitoring system with many indicators - which we will
illustrate, as a means for measuring inequalities. On the basis of register-based statistics, we are
able to shed light on objective discrimination, i.e. the unjustifiable differences in outcomes also in
a longitudinal perspective. However, the existence of unjustifiable outcomes is not evidence that
discrimination is taking place. Differences in outcome can also be due to different preferences or
other unidentified factors.

The register-based statistical system in Denmark

Denmark introduced the Personal Identification Number (PIN) in 1968 and it was used in a
census for the first time at the Population and Housing Census in 1970. Accordingly, this became
the first Danish register using the Person Number as an identification key. During the 1970s, the
first attempts were made to base the production of statistics on registers. In 1976 a register-based
population census was conducted as a pilot project, but the registers were not sufficiently
comprehensive and well-established until 1981, when a proper register-based population census
was conducted containing most of the conventional population and housing census information.

1
Blank, R.M. et al (2004) p. 246 ”Recommendation 11.1. Major longitudinal surveys, such as the Panel Study of
Income Dynamics, the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, and others, merit support as data sources for studies
of cumulative disadvantage across time, domains, generations, and population groups. Furthermore, consideration
should be given to incorporating into these surveys additional variables or special topical modules that might
enhance the utility of the data for studying the long-term effects of past discrimination. Consideration should also be
given to including questions in new longitudinal surveys that would help researchers identify experiences of
discrimination and their effects.
4
Like the other Nordic countries, the person and business registers in Denmark today cover a very
substantial part of the production of statistics. The contents of the registers cover many fields of
social statistics such as population, education, labour market, income and welfare. The strength of
the system is that the identification keys (person number, address, central business register
number and property title number) make it possible to correlate the aggregated data, both within a
specific year and longitudinally across several years.

Figure 1. The basic registers in the Danish statistical information system

CPR
1968
Person
id:
Person Number

Dwelling Enterprise
id: id:
Address CBR-No
BDR CBR
1977 1975
5/26/2006 2

The statistical system is based on three basic administrative registers: The Central Population
Register (CPR), The Central Business Register (CBR) and The Dwelling Register (BDR). These
administrative registers contain the total population of people, businesses and dwellings, and are
updated every day. Statistics Denmark receives copies of these registers, and the quality of these
registers is crucial for the quality of the statistics produced since these registers define the total
population.

As shown in figure 2, Statistics Denmark uses a range of different registers to produce statistics,
and interviews and questionnaires are also used where register information is not available. The
registers are linked by various keys for individuals, families, dwellings, workplaces and
enterprises.

Figure 2. The statistical information system

CPR Educa- Employ-

1968
Person tion ment
id:
Tax Person Number Inter-
view

Social
Question-
naire
Health
Dwelling Enterprise
id: id:
Address CBR-No
BDR CBR
1977 1975
5/26/2006 3

5
The statistical registers, which are based on administrative registers, have the following
characteristics:
- they contain high-quality data used in the administration
- they often comprise the entire population
- they cover several years
- they can be linked through a set of keys
- they are updated regularly, most often yearly

As mentioned earlier the statistical information system has been developed since the 1970s and
contains now a gold mine of data. There exists statistical information for a broad range of
subjects with individual information for a period of 30 year and with an annual updating this
system opens up possibilities for longitudinal studies.

The drawback of the system is that it only contains objective information. To show the total
picture of discrimination it is necessary to include information on subjective discrimination since
discrimination besides the facts also relates to feelings and attitudes – both for the person who is
discriminated and for the person who is the discriminator.

Differences in outcome
The first step in trying to establish knowledge about discrimination could be to look for
differences in outcomes – some are not related to discrimination, but are a result of personal
preferences – others may be a result of discrimination. Therefore, various background variables
shall be included in the analysis. Age and gender are inevitable background variables in any
analysis. When focusing on ethnic minorities, age and gender aspects of discrimination can even
be enlarged.

Using register-based statistics on differences in outcomes is primarily a method of finding

indicators of especially indirect discrimination. The statistical analyses of outcomes can
subsequently be used to conduct further studies, via surveys and other methods, as to why the
outcomes differ.

Inequalities in pay between men and women

Take for example the development of pay differentials between men and women in the general
population. From figure 3 it appears that the gap increases by age. This is of interest to a policy-
maker, but not very useful information, if you want to reduce the pay gap.

Figure 3. Gender pay gap in Denmark for different age group, 2004
100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Age 16_24 Age 25_54 Age 55_64

Men W omen

6
By differentiating between educations instead, we see in figure 4 that the pay gap increases more
and more in accordance with the level of education completed. Unfortunately, this is not either a
good story, since good policy in our welfares states is to increase the overall level of education.
Can we develop an indicator which will be useful for our policy makers?

Figure 4. Gender pay gap in Denmark by education, 2004

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Low education Middle education High education

Men W omen

If you combine education and time as in figure 5 it appears that the pay gap has lessened for the
last 3 years, and the overall pay gap has lessened. In this way you can monitor the inequality, and
be ready for action if an undesirable development should take place. There are possibilities of
looking further into the data and study pay differentials between branches or geographical areas
in order to conclude, if there are certain areas, where the problems are more evident than
elsewhere. The Danish Government has followed that road in the work for equal pay for equal
work. In the spring of 2006 the Danish Government passed legislation requiring enterprises with
more than 35 persons employed (and at least 10 in each sex group) to produce earnings statistics
for the enterprise divided by sex and occupation. The act will be effective from January 1, 2007,
and the statistics can be ordered from Statistics Denmark.

Figure 5. Gender pay gap in Denmark by education, 2002 – 2004

90

88

86

84

82

80

78

76

74

72

70
Low education Middle education High education Total

2002 2003 2004

Labour force attachment for immigrants

A very important issue concerning discrimination in Denmark is the integration of people with
foreign background. Especially, the discussion relates to how people from non-western countries
integrate in the Danish society. The question of integration is still a relatively new issue in

7
Denmark. As shown in figure 6 the share of the Danish population whose background is in a non-
western country has raised from 1 percent in 1980 to 6 percent in 2006.

Figure 6. Immigrants as share of total population, 1980 - 2006

7
6

Percent of total population

5
4
3
2
1
0
80
83
86

89
92
95
98
01
04
19
19
19
19
19
19

19
20
20
From western countries From non-western countries

The translation from a very homogeneous society to a society with several cultures has not been
easy, and there are still big differences between the persons with Danish origin and the
immigrant’s attachment to the labour market. In 2005, the employment rate for the people with
Danish origin was 75 percent while it was only 46 percent for the immigrants with a family
background in a non-western country, see figure 7. This big difference is an indicator for some
friction in the Danish society – and shows a risk of discrimination. Therefore, it is important to
analyze the reason for this. One first observation is that the problem concerning the labour market
seems to lessen over time. Over a period of 9 years, the employment rate has risen from 34
percent to 46 percent for the immigrants from non – western countries. Furthermore, the next
generation has a higher employment rate than the first generation. This also supports that time
will cure some of the problems, but if you want to influence the development a more in-depth
analysis has to be made.

Figure 7. Employment rate for the Danish population, 1997 - 2005

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Persons of danish origin Immigrants from non-western countries

Descendants from non-western countries

In Denmark, it is almost a standard procedure to control the length of stay for immigrants, when
e.g. comparing pay differentials or labour force attachment, since low qualifications with respect
to the Danish language is often considered as a drawback at Danish workplaces, and it is
supposed that the longer the stay in Denmark, the better the Danish language skills. The national
background has also been found to be an important factor for the labour attachment. As shown in

8
figure 8 immigrants from western countries have an easier entry to the Danish labour market, but
the latest information shows a change in the pattern for the immigrants from the non-western
countries. The immigrants in recent years have experienced a major increase in their labour
market attachment. It could be due to initiatives to promote the integration or due to a more
selective immigration policy.

Figure 8. Employment rates and length of stay for immigrants, 1999 and 2005
Employment rate
80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Less than 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 6 years 6 to 10 years 10 years
1 year and more
Immigrants from western countries, 1999 Immigrants from non-western countries, 1999
Immigrants from western countries, 2005 Immigrants from non-western countries, 2005

Besides language skills, education is a very important factor for labour market attachment. In
Denmark, it is very important for immigrants from non-western countries to have a Danish
education – no matter how high your education is. For immigrants with a foreign education the
labour market attachment is strikingly lower than for immigrants with a Danish education, see
figure 9. However if immigrants from a non-western country complete an education the
employment rate increases remarkably. Further analyses show that this is especially true for
women with a vocational education – the employment rate is nearly the same for women from a
non-western country and for women with Danish origin, but they do not necessarily have the
same job status. For all educational groups, immigrants from non-western countries with a
Danish education have a slightly bigger tendency to be in lower level of jobs compared to persons
of Danish origin. Here, you can point out an area, where the outcome indicates problems and
where discrimination of immigrants could be one of them. It is difficult to say if this is due to
discrimination, but it gives an idea of where to make use of further qualitative studies as to why
the difference occurs.

Figure 9. Employment rates, 16-66 years, by highest completed education and ancestry, 2005
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Vocational education Short cycle higher Medium cycle higher Long cycle higher
and training education education and bachelor education

Danish origin
Non-western immigrant with education completed in Denmark
Non-western immigrant with education completed abroad

9
Labour force attachment for women
In Denmark and the rest of the Nordic countries women have a high participation in the labour
market, but are there still gender differences in the labour market attachment? Firstly figure 10
shows that Danish women and men have nearly the same employment rate, but there are 2
periods in the lifetime, where women have a considerably lower employment rate than men.

Figure 10. Employment rate and fertility rate, 2005

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
16-17 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-66

Age

Men W omen Fertility rate

The first period with lower employment rates for women is the period in life when the families
are formed. In the same period men’s employment rate is rising and reaches its maximum at
exactly the same time. The other period is by the withdrawal from the labour market. Women
start the withdrawal already after 55 years and by 60 years of age only 33 percent of the women
are employed – for men it is nearly 50 percent.

This story was also true 20 years ago – also then women where more often outside the labour
market in the fertile years and they retired earlier than men. But figure 11 also shows that
between 1997 and 2005, the gap between men’s and women’s labour market attachment has been
narrowed notably. Does this outcome indicate that women do not have the same rights and
possibilities as men in the labour market?

Figure 11. Gender gap in employment rate, 1997 and 2005

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
16-17 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-66
Age

1997 2005

10
Summary
If by further studies, differences in outcomes in one domain turn out to be a result of
discrimination register-based statistics are a practical method for monitoring the levels of these
differences and thereby providing indicators on the levels of discrimination. When monitoring
discrimination within nations as well as comparing discrimination internationally, we need to
focus on selected domains and find methods for comparing.

Conclusion
Discrimination is on the agenda, and as national statistical institute we are asked to measure many
aspects of the phenomenon. Where is our role and where can we help? First, it is important to
define and classify the phenomenon. Measuring subjective discrimination is very difficult, and
can only be uncovered in specially designed surveys. On the other hand national statistical
institutes have a role in keeping track of objective discrimination. Our measuring systems cannot
be used to determine discrimination, but can point out areas where the outcome indicates that
there could be a problem. We can update important key indicators and in this way give policy
makers a tool for action.

11
 Annex 1.

Definition of Ancestry for statistical purposes in Denmark

Immigrant
An immigrant is defined as a person born abroad whose parents are both (or one of them if there
is no available information on the other parent) foreign citizens or were both born abroad. If there
is no available information on either of the parents and the person was born abroad, the person is
also defined as an immigrant.

Descendant
A descendant is defined as a person born in Denmark whose parents (or one of them if there is no
available information on the other parent) are either immigrants or descendants with foreign
citizenship. If there is no available information on either of the parents and the person in question
is a foreign citizen, the person is also defined as a descendant.

Person of Danish origin

A person – regardless place of birth – where at least one parent is Danish citizen and also born in
Denmark.

12
References:
Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal
treatment in employment and occupation

Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment
between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin

Blank, R.M.; Dabady, M. & Citro, C:F: (2004) Measuring Racial Discrimination. Washington,
DC: National Academies Press.

Eero, O. & Olsen B.K.: (2005) Towards Common Measures for Discrimination: Exploring
possibilities for combining existing data for measuring ethnic discrimination.
Centre for Combating Ethnic Discrimination and Danish Institute of Human Rights.

“The Conference of European Statisticians – recommendations for 2010 censuses of population

and housing”, chapter 8: “Ethno-cultural characteristics”.

Statistics Denmark: www.statbank.dk

13