Job losses in recessions visualized
Recently this graphic was posted on the "The Gavel" blog of the Speaker of the House (What 3.6 Million Jobs Lost Over 13 Months Looks Like, by "Karina," February 6th, 2009). It shows the number of jobs lost (and recovered) in the recessions of 1990, 2001, and 2008. By juxtaposing the three time periods over each other starting with the peak job month and showing employment change by month, it gives a startling comparison that highlights the severity of the current situation. It also implies that we will have a long time to wait before we reach our previous peak month.
I was curious about this graph and did a little follow up that I share below. Data librarians may find this a bit tedious, but for those who have never used raw data, it may be useful as an illustration of the difference between "data" (the raw numbers that you put into statistical software) and "statistics" (the human-viewable tables and graphs that we see in publications).
Unfortunately, as is often the case with statistical information, the source given for the graphic is incomplete: simply "Bureau of Labor Statistics." I could not find the graphic itself on the bls.gov site, so I assume that the chart was constructed from BLS data, specifically, the Current Population Survey or the Current Employment Statistics Survey. These two surveys count employment differently -- one is a survey of individuals and the other is a survey of employers.
There is a similar, but not identical, chart ("Percent change in total nonfarm employment, from beginning of recession) in the January 2009 (released February 6, 2009) Current Employment Statistics Highlights, Monthly (Bureau of Labor Statistics), so my guess is that someone at the Speaker's office built the chart from the raw CES data.
Just out of curiosity, I went to the CES "Most Requested Statistics webpage and downloaded "Total Nonfarm Employment - CES0000000001" for 1990 through the end of 2008. Raw data suitable for analysis even look "raw," not even like a statistical table:
1990,Jan,109151 1990,Feb,109396 1990,Mar,109611 1990,Apr,109651 1990,May,109800 1990,Jun,109817 1990,Jul,109775 1990,Aug,109567 1990,Sep,109485 1990,Oct,109324 1990,Nov,109180 1990,Dec,109120 1991,Jan,109001 1991,Feb,108695 1991,Mar,108535 1991,Apr,108324 1991,May,108196 1991,Jun,108283 ...
Of course, it is relatively easy, using statistical software, to construct tables and graphs from raw data. Here, for example, is a published statistical table with essentially the same raw information (but from CPS, not CES) that I downloaded. (See the full table from Employment from the BLS household and payroll surveys: summary of recent trends, February 6, 2009).
By using the raw data to create a graph, one can tell a story that has more impact than just a table of numbers. It is relatively easy to get these data into statistical software. I used Excel and Stata to create a small time-series data file. I organized it by month (from month "1" to month "48") with each row of the data file having data for 3 recessions. The first row has data for the first month of the three recessions, the second row has data for the second month, etc. The CES data has employment totals in millions. For example, the employment for 2008:
138152 138080 137936 137814 137654 137517 137356 137228 137053 136732 136352 135755 135178
I had to compute a new variable for each recession: the cumulative number of jobs lost. So, for example, 2008:
138152 0 138080 -72 137936 -216 137814 -338 137654 -498 137517 -635 137356 -796 137228 -924 137053 -1099 136732 -1420 136352 -1800 135755 -2397 135178 -2974
The first 12 months with all three recessions (v1, v2, v3) and the computed variables (1990, 2001, 2008) look like this:
month v1 1990 v2 2001 v3 2008 1 109817 0 132530 0 138152 0 2 109775 -42 132500 -30 138080 -72 3 109567 -250 132219 -311 137936 -216 4 109485 -332 132175 -355 137814 -338 5 109324 -493 132047 -483 137654 -498 6 109180 -637 131922 -608 137517 -635 7 109120 -697 131762 -768 137356 -796 8 109001 -816 131518 -1012 137228 -924 9 108695 -1122 131193 -1337 137053 -1099 10 108535 -1282 130901 -1629 136732 -1420 11 108324 -1493 130723 -1807 136352 -1800 12 108196 -1621 130591 -1939 135755 -2397
Here is a complete tab-separated-values version of the data file I constructed. Then I used Stata to build a graph and it looks very much like the one at the Speaker's Blog.
Of course, when one tells one story, one leaves out other stories. This graphic doesn't show that the starting points of the recessions were different: 1990: 109 million 2001: 132 million 2008: 138 million
Open re-usable government informationOne could use the raw data to tell a lot of different stories and analyze the data in many different ways. And that brings me to the connection between all this and why we need to be sure that government information is not just "free as in beer" but also "free as in open."
It is important for statistical agencies to publish statistics to help us understand their raw data. But, it is also essential that they provide us with the raw data so that we can better understand their statistics and do our own analyses. Most of the statistical agencies of the U.S. government do an excellent job of making their raw data easily available. In fact, the rest of government would do well to use statistical agencies as a model for instantiating their information in usable and re-usable formats (in addition to any publishing and presentation of their data/information) so that the information, whether it is text or images or video or sound or numbers, can be used, reused, analyzed, stored, and preserved.
Continue readingPrivacy on the Internet: going or already gone?
Two recent stories in the New York Times summarize the issue of privacy in the digital age.
- Do We Need a New Internet?, By JOHN MARKOFF, New York Times, February 15, 2009.
- As Data Collecting Grows, Privacy Erodes, By NOAM COHEN, New York Times, February 16, 2009.
Won’t Get Fooled Again: Day 25
With the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 now on its way to Obama for his signature, the question remains about what happens next. Word is Obama will be setting the stage for his next initiative -- a global fix on broken mortgages. Again, this demonstrates a clear set of scheduled (and unscheduled) events libraries of all types might use to promote a greater awareness about the implications of the soon to be enacted law (and subsequent policies and initiatives) for their communities. Recovery.gov is still aborning, profit and non-profit groups will offer, or do so now, there own web-enabled looks at the massive spending bill. But, what strikes me as missing from these techno-centric transparency efforts is the inability to explain the politics (or the policy implications) behind the numbers. One small example -- when people look at Thomas' links to H.R. 1, they will find seven different versions of the bill (soon to be eight when the President makes it a public law on Tuesday.) No where in the Thomas web site is any of this explained. I am fully aware there are links to selected published guides produced by the House Clerk and Senate Secretary that explain the legislative process -- but how many times have seen the thousand yard stare displace interest in the eyes of users as you attempt to explain the treasure hunt in locating relevant information sources. I think the basic operating program of American civic engagement is not the information technology. It's these fundamental government information sources (laws, regulations, rules, court decisions, reports, studies, etc.) And the technology still can not deepen the necessary political and social contexts of how all these information sources relate to each other. This one is for Daniel Cornwell --Imagine the possibilities if -- somehow, someway -- our several library associations were able to coordinate a national civic literacy program to enable trained and interested government information librarians to engage citizens in workshops, discussion groups, classes, and events that discuss and outline sources of information about the government's efforts to recover from the economic crises. This is the context building (and deepening) often missing from purely technological approaches. See you Day 26. Continue reading
Guide of the Week: Love at First Sight
After a 13 week stint of covering how librarian-produced information guides could help inform President Obama, the Congress and the general public on the General Accountability Office's 13 Urgent Transition issues, we return to our regular format of one guide per week. In honor of Valentine's day, we highlight the one handout in the ALA GODORT Handout Exchange with the word "Love" in the the title:
Documents Librarianship: Love at First Sight, Powerpoint file (Grace York, University of Michigan, 2002) Creative Commons License - may be reused or altered with attribution to creator.This 2002 powerpoint presentation is an introduction to documents librarianship for non-specialists. I think it does a great job of highlighting the great breadth of government information in people's lives. Grace shows how government documents eventually touch anyone you can think of - workers, family members, students, business owners and so on. The slides also document challenges and trends in documents librarianship and in particular the challenges and opportunities facing Federal Depository Libraries (FDLs). While the FDL stats Grace used are dated, they could quickly be brought up to date for a presentation on government documents. Despite being seven years old, this powerpoint still stands as a handy intro to the world of US government information. Check it out. Then, if you're a documents librarian, bring it up to date, give Grace York proper credit for the original and link the resulting product back to the Handout Exchange. Continue reading
Won’t Get Fooled Again: Day 24
Happy Valentines Day! Happy Stimulus Day! Late last night, the U.S. Senate signed off on the stimulus deal. Far from an object of attraction between political partisans (only three republicans (all Senators) voted in favor of the legislation) -- a significant victory for Obama and his plans to "reboot" our national political/social perspective nonetheless. So, what will the various open government/civic information partisans do with this milestone? Perhaps it will give some hope that in spite of the lack of bipartisanship, it demonstrates a certain strength among democrats to hold their focus in face of strong republican push back. For the last fifty years, the democratic/liberal forces always seemed more receptive to the devices and desires of the free government information coalition. And the legislation itself represents a funding opportunity of a different kind, what with its millions of dollars slated for improvement in schools, universities, public libraries, and broadband infrastructure. Of course, who and when will get this federal bounty still remains to be seen. But, again, it just one more indication that we live in a time beset by both dislocation and opportunity. And in the fog of economic turmoil it is often difficult to distinguish between the two. I go back to my call for some kind of professional unity among the library associations and groups on this important issue. At the risk of sounding like some old testament prophet wandering in from a desert to harangue a community -- a time of reckoning is upon us. The principal institutional arrangement for national access to government information -- the federal depository library system -- is in a period of strategic planning and reconsideration of its core mission. Governments are either rushing blindly, or deliberately, into the next stages of digital government. Special interest groups and other organizations are well down the road towards the articulation of an evolved new civic information structure that does not necessarily assume the necessity of libraries in the same way these ancient institutions served in earlier epochs of technology. Participate in person, or virtually, in the upcoming Federal Depository Library council meeting in April. Note, especially, that the Public Printer is specifically asking library directors of depository institutions to come to Florida and participate. With many of these directors contemplating their future involvement in the depository program, and many more reorganizing stand-alone government information departments into mergers with other units, or out of existence all together -- you just have to know we are well past the tipping point. Change is going to come. It is just a question of how much we want to shape that change. The Association of Research Libraries has launched a major study to consider the future structure of the federal depository library program. As the study's prospectus points out -- There is a need and opportunity to identify a sustainable framework that will provide access to and preservation of government information in the years ahead. A new framework will address financial sustainability as well as the essential components of infrastructure for collaboration among federal depository libraries and with other stakeholders. Working with consultants, ARL will identify and explore such a framework that permits flexibility in the future while ensuring enduring access and providing for the efficient management of the legacy collections to insure the broadest public access to government information. Such access has been the hallmark of the FDLP. The framework approach is proposed as an opportunity to specify one or more models for configuring collection resources, access infrastructure, and expertise that would optimally support the the interests of an informed public and the capacity of our Nation’s libraries. When nearly 66 percent of the depository libraries are house in academic institutions, such an examination will have no small influence on many of those library directors being invited to Florida by the Public Printer. And at this summer's annual ALA conference, the Council on Legislation will host a special session among all participating ALA chapters, divisions, and roundtables with a specific interest in the depository library program's future. Just as Congress and the President struggle to work together in very difficult circumstances that challenge their constitutional prerogatives, especially steeped in the partisan bitterness that lingers from the last several national elections, so to will librarians and their allies need to come to terms and work together to build next century's civic information infrastructure. As a librarian with twenty-five years experience I really, really want my beloved institution to be part of that great project. As a student of our country's long running political and social conflicts, I know that what I want and what will happen is often determined by how much I am willing to join the discussion and the struggle in an effort to make that crucial difference. These next five months offer any number of opportunities to contribute. As I said in yesterday's blog -- a vibrant civic exchange of public information depends more on the sustainability of critical relationships between citizens and their government, and less on the methods/technology of civic information distribution. And just as St. Valentine represents both the romantic notion of love and faithfulness, there is a much more complicated side to this particular martyr's faith -- a defiance of authority to honor relationships. As one account puts it -- ... Valentine was a priest who served during the third century in Rome. When Emperor Claudius II decided that single men made better soldiers than those with wives and families, he outlawed marriage for young men — his crop of potential soldiers. Valentine, realizing the injustice of the decree, defied Claudius and continued to perform marriages for young lovers in secret. When Valentine's actions were discovered, Claudius ordered that he be put to death. One doesn't need to be a martyr. Just get involved. See you on Day 25. Continue reading
