Talk:Bahá'í statistics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 minimum count, not an estimated total 2 Structure 3 Distribution 4 Does size matter?

[edit] minimum count, not an estimated total

"official Bahá'í counts claim to be only a minimum count, not an estimated total"

I don't understand this point. My understanding was that Baha'i institutions always enrol anyone who comes to them saying they are a Baha'i, and this is needed for elections.

Please can you clarify what you mean? AndrewRT 14:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

The statement compares the counts that the Baha'i sources claim (5 million), and those found in other encyclopedic sources: Brittanica (> 6 million), World Christian Encyclopedia (>7.4 million). -- Jeff3000 14:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

If you see statistics for a group like the Jehovah's Witnesses, they publish the number of "witnesses" down to single digits. The most recent publications on Baha'i population have only said something like "There are at least 5 million" in 1985, then sometime around 2000 they published another one with the value of 6 million (I can't find source material for that). Anyway, there is no in between, and it means exactly what it says: at least. Meaning that they can be totally sure of the 5 million in 1985, insinuating that there are more out there, but it's better to undershoot and avoid people like Dawud making accusations about inflating numbers. Cuñado - Talk 16:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

When I was doing research a few years ago I surveyed Baha'i NSAs. Never once did anyone say "at least..." they always gave me an estimated total. I would like to change the wording to something that makes the point you are trying to make more precise.

In the meantime, please find a link below to UK Census data on the Baha'i population in the UK. This reveals that 4,645 people in Britain entered "Baha'i" when asked the question "what is your religion". By contrast the UK Baha'i community claims to have a membership of "around 6,000" - see http://www.bahai.org.uk/gi/intro.htm. This is an overstatement of 30%. I suggest that Baha'i communities throughout the west are similarly overstated. Perhaps I can have your comments. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BahaiMonitor/message/4

AndrewRT 19:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, as I posted on the talk page on the Baha'i Faith wikipedia page, because of the small percentage of Baha'is in regards to the total number of people in a country, surveys and census data tend to underestimate the total number of Baha'is. What I mean by the word tend is that through the field of statistics it has been proven that the probability that the number is underestimated for small groups is quite large. -- Jeff3000 19:28, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jeff3000, Thanks for your comment. There's clearly a significant discrepancy here between the number of people recorded as Baha'i on the census and the number of members claimed by the Baha'i NSA. I'm quite keen to understand the cause of this discrepancy, and I won't run to any conclusion about which figure is necessarily the "true one". Having said that, I'm not sure I understand your point about small communities. I had a look at the discussion page on Baha'i Faith - demographics - and the closest I could come up with was:

Statistically, the smaller the number of people in a group, the probability that the number is underestimated is very large. This is once again mathematically proven. So a larger poll would statistically show a larger amount of Baha'is that what is currently shown in polls, not less as you try to argue

Is this the bit you were referring to? If so, I'm not sure it would apply here. I agree with what you say when you have an opinion poll that is questioning 2,000 people out of a population of 50,000,000 and then extrapolating the results over the entire population; however in this case the data was a strict census where something like 90% of the population returned the form and no extrapolation was done. I can't understand why a small community would statistically be understated in such a census, any more than a large community would be. Could you clarify this point for me? AndrewRT 20:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

You're right AndrewRT that such a large census removes the underestimation. I didn't click that you wrote census (and what it is) and instead thought of a survey. As to the causes of this discrepancy, I am unsure just as you state, but possible reasons are those which Cuanado mentions below. People might have signed a card, and were not consolidated, and thus either fail to indentify themselves as a Baha'i or may not be confortable indentifing themselves as Baha'i on a survey. -- Jeff3000 22:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Its one of those odd things though, you can never be sure how accurate statistics are. I think the official UK figure is around 6000 Baha'is, but according to the World Christian Encyclopedia (2001) there are 36000[1], and last I heard the national census of 2001 made us out to be 22000. As a British Baha'i, I'd say 6000 is a much more realistic figure, but its hard to say as I'm only considering active Baha'is there..... -- Tomhab 21:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

The at least reference is in regards to the worldwide Baha'i community. Few countries are organized enough to operate a census or count the number of Baha'is when the definition of membership changes in different cultures. No doubt that countries like the UK with a well structured administration can make better estimate.

In regards to the census in the UK. Are you insinuating that Baha'is are purposefully inflating numbers? Keeping accurate running statistics is nearly impossible, especially for a religion. The article mentions that many people declare themselves as Baha'is and then drift away for whatever reason. But nobody knows whether those people have renounced the religion or just are too busy. Without spending an enormous amount of energy in bookkeeping, of course there's going to be an overshoot, but that is not a problem with Baha'is, it's a problem with keeping statistics, and is shared by other religions. Trying to estimate what that margin of error is by personal experience or isolated countries is very unscientific and would be considered original research (something Wikipedia is clearly against). Unless you can provide some hefty references then I wouldn't suggest it.

Hi Cunado. I've provided the references - 2001 UK government census - and I suggest it is valid evidence. I am not suggesting bad faith on the part of the UK Baha'i NSA, just bias and inaccuracy. They do have an incentive to overstate figures but more importantly there is a structural bias because people becoming Baha'i get added to the data whereas most people leaving the Faith (most people drift away rather than disenroll) do not. I suggest that people who are on the list because they signed a card twenty years ago, haven't been active for ages and decline to answer "Baha'i" when asked in a census should NOT be included in the figures. Do you disagree? AndrewRT 13:44, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

My understanding is that the worldwide population is "at least" 6 million considering the overshoot, and is a lower estimate (I have no reference). This is also because the total number of Baha'is is not really that important to anybody. Simply converting the masses is not as important as consolidation and creating well deepened believers. A simple declaration of faith is only considered a milestone along a journey, unlike some Christian denominations which consider it the goal. Cuñado - Talk 21:35, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that's the reason. Baha'is have detailed membership lists for most countries in the world. Many figures are based on extrapolation (we grew by 10% last year, it was 5m a year ago so I guess its about 5.5m now. My guess is that the "at least" answer is an attempt at conservative extrapolation (so they would say "at least 5.3m to give themselves a margin of error) rather than anything else. AndrewRT 13:44, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you. There is obviously an overshoot because of that reason, that people disenrolling never tell anyone. But like I said, it's a problem with bookkeeping, and not a fault of the Baha'is. What I was objecting to was using the UK model and applying that percentage of error to the entire Baha'i world, especially when I think the total is an undershoot. I would need to do more research into what the estimated total from the Baha'i world center represents to continue debating what it actually represents. Cuñado - Talk 17:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Structure

I suggest this article needs significant work done to improve it's content and structure.

I would like to suggest the following structure:

• introduction - as is, with an additional point that the figures are disputed by some former Baha'is
• section on growth
• section on definition of membership
• section on distribution around world
• section on Iran including bit on persecution from intro
• section on rest of Asia including current bit on Indian census
• section on Europe & NA including current bit on US and my bit on UK
• section on rest of world

disputes should be mentioned under the relevant section What do you think? AndrewRT 19:56, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea!!! Go for it -- Jeff3000 20:32, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Juan Cole (being the former Baha'i) is already mentioned, and his relevance is already disputed, so I don't think it should be in the intro.

I think expanding to more countries is a great idea. I added most of the US statistics because that is one of the only countries with a lot of information. I doubt that other areas have very much details available. Cuñado - Talk 21:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and started to flesh out more countries, particularly in North America, where I'm more familiar, but added African countries and divided the countries into continental regions. It's a work in progress, so help would be greatly appreciated, as I am very short on time and it's piddly work. Especially if you can add a paragraph or two on the origins of the Faith in a given country and any recent census data if such exists.

I did this without reading the discussion (my bad), and I like the above mentioned structure, but I still think chunking up regions makes sense, separating Europe and NA, and not lumping Africa in with "Rest of the world". I do think that mentioning Iran in a seperate category might be useful, though perhaps it should be mentioned once earlier for origins of the faith and its growth patterns, then once again in the regional list, with its current state mentioned. this way the current conditions can be kept isolated (in the article) from historical conditions and origins.

I have to admit I made a bit of a mess that needs to be cleaned up, but it'll take some time to get it right. --Christian Edward Gruber 23:02, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Distribution

As promised here is an extract from the (now dated) research I did back in NOvember 1996 on distribution of Baha'is around the world:

• 1. India 2,262,126 (1996, private correspondance with NSA)
• 2. Philippines 350,785 (1995, private correspondence with NSA)
• 3. Iran 300,000 (1988, World Christian Encyclopedia based on projection from historic figures; these projections are not accruate for other countries)
• 4. Malaysia 200,000 (1995, private correspondence with NSA)
• 5. United States 130,000 (1988, Europa Year Book based on projections)
• 6. Bolivia 85,000 (1988, Europa Year Book based on projections)
• 7. Guyana 50,000 (private correspondence with Baha'i)
• 8. Brazil 45,211 (1996, private correspondence with NSA)
• 9. Zimbabwe 17,270 (1988, World Christian Encyclopedia projection)
• 10. Zambia 14,560 (1988, World Christian Encyclopedia projection)
• 11. Australia 12,224 (1996, NSA quoted in "Baha'i Weekly Planner")
• 12. Albania 12,000 (1996, private correspondence with NSA)

I would treat the projected figures with significant scepticism.

AndrewRT 20:15, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

That's great. Do you have copies of the letters from the NSA's? Cuñado - Talk 21:44, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Possibly - I'll have a look to see if I kept them. AndrewRT 13:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

As an interesting connection to this, check out this link. It claims India has 1.7 million, and the US has 753 thousand. Other estimates appear to be wrong also. Cuñado - Talk 19:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Does size matter?

A few people have said in comments on this topic that size is not that important. Why does it matter how many Baha'is there are anyway?

From a theological point of view, of course size is irrelevant. Truth is independent of the number of people who believe it to be true, and God does not depends on our approval.

However, from a sociological point of view size is definitely important. In Britain, the Baha'i Faith claims to be "one of the nine major world religions in Britain". The fact that in numerical terms the Baha'i Faith comes about number 25 means that this claim is questionable.

Credibility is very important for the Baha'i Faith, as it gets them recognised, and increases their impact when dealing with secular authorities. From their point of view, why woudl they bother listening to the Baha'is if there are only a handful of them anyway? Many Baha'is rely on the claimed global size of their religion to give them credibility as a "global religion". If this was shown to be exaggerated it would have a definite impact on how the religion is treated. AndrewRT 13:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed on everything. When I introduce the Faith to people who have never heard of it before, I admit that I often mention that there are 6 million Baha'is in the world in almost every country. It gives credibility and makes people realize that it's not some whacko nutjob cult. I also reference the fact that truth is independent of that. Cuñado - Talk 17:50, 5 December 2005 (UTC)