Abstract

The 2010 Saint Lucia Population and Housing Census is conducted by the Central Statistical Office staff. The island-nation of Saint Lucia recorded an overall household population increase of 5 percent from May 2001 to May 2010 based on estimates derived from a complete enumeration of the population of Saint Lucia during the conduct of the recently completed 2010 Population and Housing Census. Saint Lucia's total resident population as at midnight on Census Day, the 10th May 2010 stood at 166,526 persons. Saint Lucia's total population including non-resident persons was estimated to be 173,720, the total number of non-resident persons was 7,194. The preliminary count of Saint Lucia's enumerated population was 151,864 persons reflecting a response rate to the census of 92%. The total resident population of St. Lucia is comprised of 82,926 males and 83,600 females. Out of this sum, there were 165,595 individuals residing in private households, 931 persons living in institutions.

A modern population and housing census is the process of collecting, compiling, analyzing, and publishing demographic, socio-economic, and environmental data pertaining to all persons in a country and the national housing stock at a specified time. A census is a form of national stocktaking. Since the census is a complete count of the population and living quarters, it provides detailed benchmark data on the size of the population, age structure, educational attainment, economic activity, disability, housing, and household amenities as well as other major socio-economic characteristics.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage includes all Administrative Districts and Political Constituencies

Analysis unit

• Households,
• Individuals.

Universe

The Census covered all de jure household members (usual residents of St Lucia based on the six month criteria). The fertility of all women aged 15-49 years resident in the household, and all children aged 0-4 years (under age 5) resident in the household. The Census also collected data on dwelling and housing conditions of all resident householders. In the Census Visitation record all de jure household members were counted by sex, in addition, persons present in St Lucia at the time of the census who were not usual residents were also counted to produce the de facto population of St Lucia on census day May 10, 2010.

Kind of data

Census/enumeration data [cen]

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaires were bound together into booklets. Each booklet contained a cover page (for identification and the Record of Visits), page 2 for Listing the names of the members of the Household and for any comments needed concerning any member of the household or any part of the enumeration. NATIONAL ARCHIVES, INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION and HOUSING spread over pages 3 to 5.

After these sections, three individual questionnaires (6 pages each) complete the booklet. These booklets provide for three (3) persons and are to be used for households consisting of three (3) or fewer persons. If the household comprises more than three persons, the main booklet plus the number of additional person questionnaires were required. For example,

For a 1, 2, 3-person household, use one booklet;

For a 4-person household, use one booklet plus one additional person questionnaire.

For a 5-person household, use one booklet plus two additional person questionnaires and so on.

The ED Number and the Household number contained on the front cover page of the main questionnaire was transferred to the top of the front page of EVERY person questionnaire whether or not it was an individual questionnaire within the main booklet or whether it was an individual questionnaire applicable to a household with more than three persons.

STRUCTURE OF THE INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONNAIRE

The individual questionnaire starts at Section 3. The questions are divided into eleven groups, each having a central theme and given a section number as follows:

Section 3: Personal Characteristics (for all persons) Section 4: Birthplace & Residence (for all persons) Section 5: Disability (for all persons) Section 6: Health (for all persons) Section 7: Education and Internet Access (for all persons) Section 8: Professional, Technical & Vocational Training (for persons 15 years and over) Section 9: Economic Activity (for persons 15 years and over) Section 10: Income and Livelihood (for females 15 years and over) Section 11: Marital Status and Union Status (for persons 15 years and over) Section 12: Fertility (for persons 15 years and over) Section 13: Where Spent Census Night (for all persons)

Cleaning operations

Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing, including (See External Resource for more information on this item):

a) Field Editing by interviewers and field supervisors The guidelines for the conduct of these edits were laid out in PART IX: Checking Your Questionnaires for Errors in the Enumerators Manual. These instructions are repeated in the supervisors manual and also stated in the contract for payment of enumerators and supervisors. A number of elements of the edits outlined formed the basis for the payment of enumerators and supervisors.

b) Office editing and questionnaire re-numbering When a full set of questionnaires from a completed ED was recieved by the office, persons assigned as census evaluators had the responsibility to review the content of each Questionnaire to check for completeness. They were required to perform checks on the questionnaires and the visitation records for the key geographic variables and perform other checks in line with the requirements of a Census Evaluation form which laid out quality standards for the approval of a completed ED for payment. The Census evaluation form is provided as an external resource for information.

c) Data Capture, Editing and Coding during scanning and data verification The data was captured using TELEform V10.4.1 and the data from the forms was exported to a SQL Server 2005 database as was all other census related information captured on forms, such as the census 2010 Evaluation form, referred to previously, the census visitation record etc.

The names of the SQL Server Databases are as follows: 1) Census2010 containing Tables: Census2010Persons, Census2010House, Census2010Visit, Census2010Evaluation, Census2010ApplicationForms, CensusTestScores, Census2010Institutions 2) Census2010_Validated contained data which was validated on several metrics outline in a VBA program built into the TELEform v10.4 software used to capture the data after scanning.

The correction of geographic variables was completed during this process. The scanner operator would manually enter the ED code for the batch being scanned, he would also enter the first and last household for the batch manually. Later the verifier would independantly verify the ED and the household number entered by the enumerator against the values entered by the scanner operator to ensure that they were either the same as in the case of the ED number or within the range of households expected in the batch as in the case of the household number. This was done using VBA validation code written within the TELEform 10.4.1 software used for the scanning and capture of the data from the Census.

Computer Assisted Coding was built into the TELEform template, this method assisted the enumerator using keywords to identify the code for the entry of the appropriate settlement, industry or occupation code. A listing of the codes used is attached to this document as an external resource. Occupation codes are in the international format of ISCO-08 while the industry code applied is based on ISIC Rev4.

d) Structure checking and completeness in Foxpro

The data was exported to MS Access and then on to MS Foxpro where some basic editing was done.

1) This involved the conversion of descriptions of settlement, ISCO and ISIC data collected in fields to codes 2) Standardizing the lenghts and format of all fields in the dataset in preparation for conversion to CSPRO ASCII data format 3) Transposing data on Migration, deaths, disability and births in the last 12 months to variables in the household and person files 4) Removal of blank and very incomplete records 5) Removal of all duplicates and the cleaning of all inconsistent records between the household and the person file. 6) Creation of CSPRO 4.0 compatible format data file for use in further editing and cleaning

e) Detailed variable level editing using CSPRO 4.0 and hotdecking Detailed programs were developed to clean census data on critical variables in the housing section of the questionnaire such as Type of Dwelling, household assets etc, demographic variables such as age, sex, education and economic activiity variables were cleaned in the first version of the CSPRO 4.0 *.bch program file developed. After the first version of the cleaning program was complete the Statistical Office published the Preliminary Census 2010 Report (Updated April 2010). The first version of this publication released in January contained only data on population counts from the census visitation records. The updated April 2010 Preliminary Census report contained information on all the main variables cleaned in the first version of the cleaning program. The CSPRO 4.0 program employed the use of many 3-dimensional hotdecking programs to correct for items not stated or recorded.

f) Checking of data files using the Tabulation Features of CSPRO 4.0 and SPSS 19 Crosstabulations of variables were used to identify inconsistent data and improve CSPRO 4.0 editing programs

Detailed documentation of

India FII/FPI Investments: USD: Assets Under Custody: Net: Household and Personal Products: Equity data was reported at -9.000 USD mn in 15 Nov 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 31.000 USD mn for 31 Oct 2018. India FII/FPI Investments: USD: Assets Under Custody: Net: Household and Personal Products: Equity data is updated daily, averaging -2.500 USD mn from Jan 2012 (Median) to 15 Nov 2018, with 164 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 193.000 USD mn in 29 Feb 2012 and a record low of -1.326 USD bn in 15 Jul 2013. India FII/FPI Investments: USD: Assets Under Custody: Net: Household and Personal Products: Equity data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Securities Depository Limited. The data is categorized under India Premium Database’s Financial Market – Table IN.ZA031: Foreign Institutional Investors (FII) / Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) Investment: Assets Under Custody: Net: USD.

【リソース】Volume 1_10-1_Trends in divorces by each prefecture:Japan / Volume 1_10-2_Trends in divorce rates (per 1,000 population) by each prefecture:Japan / Volume 1_10-3_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by month of registration:Japan / Volume 1_10-4_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by legal type:Japan / Volume 1_10-5_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by duration of cohabitation, and mean duration of cohabitation:Japan / Volume 1_10-6_Trends in divorces by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered each year):Japan / Volume 1_10-7_Trends in divorce rates (per 1,000 population) by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered each year):Japan / Volume 1_10-8_Divorces and percent distribution by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan, 2011_(1) Divorces / Volume 1_10-8_Divorces and percent distribution by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan, 2011_(2) Percent distribution / Volume 1_10-9_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by number of children involved in divorce:Japan_(1) Divorces / Volume 1_10-9_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by number of children involved in divorce:Japan_(2) Percent distribution / Volume 1_10-10_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by wife and husband who have children involved in divorce:Japan / Volume 1_10-11_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by number of children and custody of wife and husband:Japan / Volume 1_10-12_Divorces and percent distribution by duration of cohabitation, by type of occupation for household:Japan, 2010_(1) Divorces / Volume 1_10-12_Divorces and percent distribution by duration of cohabitation, by type of occupation for household:Japan, 2010_(2) Percent distribution / Volume 1_10-13_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by nationality of wife and husband : Japan / Volume 1_10-14_Divorces by nationality of wife and husband : Japan, each prefecture and 20 major cities, 2011 / Volume 1_10-15_Percent distribution of divorces by nationality of wife and husband:Japan, each prefecture and 20 major cities, 2011 / Volume 2_1_Divorces by month of registration:Japan, each prefecture and 20 major cities / Volume 2_2_Divorces by month of registration by month and year cohabitation terminated:Japan / Volume 2_3_Divorces by single years of age of husband and wife (for divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan / Volume 2_4_Divorces by legal type:Japan, each prefecture and 20 major cities / Volume 2_5_Divorces by legal type, duration of marriage and type of occupation of household:Japan / Volume 2_6_Divorces by age of husband and wife and duration of marriage (for divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan / Volume 2_7_Divorces by number of children involved in divorce and number of children who are to be in wife's custody (all divorces and divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan / Volume 2_8_Divorces by duration of marriage and number of children involved in divorce (all divorces and divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan / Vital Statistics_Vital statistics of Japan_Final data_Divorces_Yearly_2011 / Volume 1_10-1_Trends in divorces by each prefecture:Japan,Volume 1_10-2_Trends in divorce rates (per 1,000 population) by each prefecture:Japan,Volume 1_10-3_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by month of registration:Japan,Volume 1_10-4_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by legal type:Japan,Volume 1_10-5_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by duration of cohabitation, and mean duration of cohabitation:Japan,Volume 1_10-6_Trends in divorces by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered each year):Japan,Volume 1_10-7_Trends in divorce rates (per 1,000 population) by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered each year):Japan,Volume 1_10-8_Divorces and percent distribution by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan, 2011_(1) Divorces,Volume 1_10-8_Divorces and percent distribution by age of wife and husband at time of decree (for divorces separated and registered in 2011):Japan, 2011_(2) Percent distribution,Volume 1_10-9_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by number of children involved in divorce:Japan_(1) Divorces,Volume 1_10-9_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by number of children involved in divorce:Japan_(2) Percent distribution,Volume 1_10-10_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by wife and husband who have children involved in divorce:Japan,Volume 1_10-11_Trends in divorces and percent distribution by number of children and custody of wife and husband:Japan,Volume 1_10-12_Divorces and percent distribution by duration of cohabitation, by type of occupation for household:Japan, 2010_(1) Divorces,Volume 1_10-12_

India FII/FPI Investments: USD: Assets Under Custody: Household and Personal Products: Debt data was reported at 0.000 USD mn in 15 Nov 2018. This stayed constant from the previous number of 0.000 USD mn for 31 Oct 2018. India FII/FPI Investments: USD: Assets Under Custody: Household and Personal Products: Debt data is updated daily, averaging 0.000 USD mn from Jan 2012 (Median) to 15 Nov 2018, with 164 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 175.000 USD mn in 30 Apr 2013 and a record low of 0.000 USD mn in 15 Nov 2018. India FII/FPI Investments: USD: Assets Under Custody: Household and Personal Products: Debt data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Securities Depository Limited. The data is categorized under India Premium Database’s Financial Market – Table IN.ZA029: Foreign Institutional Investors (FII) / Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) Investment: Assets Under Custody: USD.

India FII/FPI Investments: INR: Assets Under Custody: Household and Personal Products: Equity data was reported at 1,001,030.000 INR mn in 15 Nov 2018. This records an increase from the previous number of 965,490.000 INR mn for 31 Oct 2018. India FII/FPI Investments: INR: Assets Under Custody: Household and Personal Products: Equity data is updated daily, averaging 678,995.000 INR mn from Jan 2012 (Median) to 15 Nov 2018, with 164 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,149,850.000 INR mn in 31 Aug 2018 and a record low of 279,210.000 INR mn in 31 Jan 2012. India FII/FPI Investments: INR: Assets Under Custody: Household and Personal Products: Equity data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Securities Depository Limited. The data is categorized under India Premium Database’s Financial Market – Table IN.ZA028: Foreign Institutional Investors (FII) / Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) Investment: Assets Under Custody: INR.

FII/FPI Investments: INR: Assets Under Custody: Net: Household and Personal Products: Equity data was reported at -620.000 INR mn in 15 Nov 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 2,280.000 INR mn for 31 Oct 2018. FII/FPI Investments: INR: Assets Under Custody: Net: Household and Personal Products: Equity data is updated daily, averaging -175.000 INR mn from Jan 2012 (Median) to 15 Nov 2018, with 164 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 9,430.000 INR mn in 29 Feb 2012 and a record low of -79,620.000 INR mn in 15 Jul 2013. FII/FPI Investments: INR: Assets Under Custody: Net: Household and Personal Products: Equity data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Securities Depository Limited. The data is categorized under India Premium Database’s Financial Market – Table IN.ZA030: Foreign Institutional Investors (FII) / Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) Investment: Assets Under Custody: Net: INR.

The Maintenance Act 1928 established provisions for maintenance support to be provided by husbands who had left their wives or children without means of support. Courts of Petty Sessions were empowered to hear complaints regarding desertion and to set levels and enforce the payment of maintenance. The Maintenance Act 1965 is still in force in Victoria. The Commonwealth Family Law Act 1975 also has provision for the granting of custody and maintenance and most orders are now made under this Act.

Most courts maintained a separate register for maintenance and family law matters, although the register was in the same format as all other petty sessions court registers.
The Family Law Act 1975 provided for the making of all custody orders for children of a marriage. The Family Court of Australia cannot enforce its own orders. The Magistrates Court however does have enforcement powers in some situations. Many applications detailed in these registers relate to the filing of orders and enforcement of orders made by the Family Court of Australia. The Magistrates Court does have the power to make custody orders in cases where both parties agree to have the case heard in the Magistrates Court.

Maintenance and Family Law Registers were used to record three types of maintenance matters: applications for the court to set a level of maintenance; applications for the court to vary the level of maintenance and applications for the court to enforce payments to be made where maintenance orders had been breached. Failure to comply resulted in the imprisonment of the defendant.

Maintenance and Family Law Registers record details of the names of the complainant (usually the wife) and the defendant (usually the husband), the nature of the matter before the court and the court's decision.

Among divorcing and separating parents referred by family courts to mediation to resolve issues, over half report intimate partner violence (IPV). Whether family mediation can be safely offered to cases with a history of IPV is a major controversy that has not been examined previously with empirically sound research. This study was a randomized controlled trial, the "gold standard" for assessing interventions, of family mediation cases with levels of IPV that would, historically, be considered inappropriate for mediation at our study site, a court-attached mediation center in Washington, D.C. Study cases were randomly assigned to one of three study conditions: traditional court-based litigation (n=67), shuttle mediation (n=49), or videoconferencing mediation (n=50). Researchers conducted a randomized control trial to compare immediate and one year outcomes for three dispute resolution processes (i.e., traditional court-based litigation, shuttle mediation, and videoconferencing mediation) among family law cases seeking to resolve parenting related issues and self-reporting a level of IPV history that would typically prohibit joint mediation as an option at the court-annexed mediation program where the study was conducted. The mediation intake interview included an IPV screening measure, the Mediator's Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC; Holtzworth-Munroe, Beck, and Applegate, 2010). There is initial evidence of the reliability and validity of the MASIC (Pokman et al., 2014) and research demonstrating that the MASIC leads to higher levels of detection of IPV among parents seeking mediation than other methods of IPV screening (Rossi, et al., 2015). The MASIC is a behaviorally specific measure, listing a series of abusive behaviors on subscales (e.g., psychological abuse, coercive control, physical violence, sexual violence, stalking) and consequences of abuse (e.g., fear of the partner, injury). Each item is assessed for occurrence twice-- ever in the relationship and in the past year. The questions ask the party about their victimization from the other party. Based on party responses to the Multi-Door intake interview, including the MASIC, the DRSs identified cases as being potentially eligible for the study if the level of IPV reported by either or both parties was at a level that the case was considered inappropriate for joint mediation. No specific level of IPV for study eligibility was set, for two reasons. First, no previous empirical data are available to guide decisions regarding what level of IPV would make joint mediation inappropriate. Second, the DRSs were well trained and experienced and wanted to retain the right to use their clinical judgment. However, the Multi-Door staff and research team agreed that DRSs would pay particular attention to level and types of IPV, presence of risk factors empirically related to lethality (e.g., weapons), whether IPV was escalating in frequency or severity, IPV-related injuries, and whether a party was fearful of the other party or expressed IPV-related concerns about participating in mediation.

The qualitative dataset consists of interviews with social workers in Tampere, Finland who make assessments of the need for child protection services. The interviews contain three vignettes relating to child protection services that the interviewees read at the beginning of the interview. Themes of the vignettes included court proceedings in the case of a dysfunctional breakup, parental alienation and excessive use of alcohol, and uneven conditions between parents. The interviewees were asked questions regarding the vignettes and how well they portrayed reality. Background information included educational background and number of years working in child protection. The dataset is only available in Finnish.

This dataset consists of interviews with Finnish social workers concerning child custody evaluations commissioned by district courts in custody dispute situations. Municipalities and joint municipal authorities with over 12,000 inhabitants in North Ostrobothnia were selected for the study. The data contain eight individual interviews. In the interviews, the social workers discussed contents of their work relating to custody evaluations: e.g. meeting deadlines, who commissioned custody evaluations, how many evaluations were carried out annually in the municipality, how many times they met the children and parents during evaluation, and whether the interviewees considered custody evaluations part of their child protection work. The interviewees also assessed the significance and quality of cooperation with different actors as well as how child custody evaluation work fit in with their other work. All interviewees work in the North Ostrobothnia region. No other background information is available. The dataset is only available in Finnish.

India FII/FPI Investments: Assets Under Custody: Hindu Undivided Families: Equity data was reported at 170.000 INR mn in Oct 2018. This stayed constant from the previous number of 170.000 INR mn for Sep 2018. India FII/FPI Investments: Assets Under Custody: Hindu Undivided Families: Equity data is updated monthly, averaging 260.000 INR mn from Jun 2014 (Median) to Oct 2018, with 53 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 680.000 INR mn in Sep 2016 and a record low of 140.000 INR mn in May 2018. India FII/FPI Investments: Assets Under Custody: Hindu Undivided Families: Equity data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Securities Depository Limited. The data is categorized under India Premium Database’s Financial Market – Table IN.ZA033: Foreign Institutional Investors (FII) / Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) Investment: Assets Under Custody: by Institutions.

No notes provided

No notes provided