This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
Sortition Foundation – 23rd June 2021
In every climate assembly we (obviously) see severe skewing towards registrations from those who care more about climate change, so the point of introducing a question about climate attitude is to ensure that the assembly is not only full of people who care deeply about the issue but includes voices of those who think differently.
For this reason the main aim is to make sure that, assuming Jersey residents have the same attitude to climate as those from the IPSOS/Mori survey these numbers are taken from, that 15% of the people are not in either of the "concerned" groups, and that with the "concerned" group (85%) they are not all from the "very concerned" group. Since the last 3 responses to the survey (not at all/other/don't know) are all very small we group them simply to make a selection feasible that still achieves our principal aim of this question. This is what we did also for the UK Climate Assembly, Scotland's Climate Assembly and the many local climate assemblies.
As you can see we had very few registrations from those outside the "concerned" groups (9 people in total) so it was always going to be a challenge, but our selection algorithm chose 7 of those people (the target was 6.8 people from these groups).
Unfortunately, during the confirmation phase (when we call people and inform them that they have been selected) a few of these (and other) people dropped out (including 2 of the 3 people who registered as "not very concerned"). It is near impossible to find exact matches for people who drop out (there are many thousands of possible potential profiles of people across age, gender, geography, socio-economic profile etc) and so when making replacements we have to make a judgement (which was informed by discussions with you) about which categories are more important. For example, it was considered essential to have a 16-17 year old no matter what their attitude to climate change was, and so this introduces small amounts of skewing into the final assembly.
We consider the confirmed numbers to be quite a success given the skewing in overall responses as we still have 6 from the "not concerned" groups and wanted 6.8.
I hope that explains the discrepancies!