LGBTI in OECD Countries

Abstract

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

Surveying Persons in Same-Sex Relationships in a Probabilistic Way – An Example from the Netherlands

“…Note that the joint study of LGB and heterosexual respondents poses unique challenges in terms of the framing of the study to potential respondents. However, in order to study structural disadvantage along sexual orientation lines, it is indispensable to study both groups jointly (Umberson et al 2015;Valfort 2017). Therefore, the UNICON data is unique in the way it incorporates both LGB and heterosexual respondents and covers both general and LGB-specific topics.…”

“…In the last decade, the call for improved estimates of lesbians, gay men and bisexual (LGB) populations has grown steadily (Valfort 2017;OECD 2019). This is related to the increasing visibility of same-sex unions and the rapidly evolving changes in the legal and normative institutional frameworks regarding sexual diversity in Western countries.…”

“…Besides the importance of the cultural competence of the researcher studying hard-to-survey populations (e.g., Dillman et al 2009;Tourangeau 2014), a number of techniques have been used to improve response rates to questions relating to sensitive topics. For instance, modes of data collection (such as the web) that foster participants' sense of confidentiality or anonymity may yield higher rates of disclosure (e.g., Valfort 2017;Villarroel et al 2006).…”

Suicide rates have been falling on average, but countries display a diverse trend pattern

“…Consequently, survey methods that do not provide respondents with a sufficient sense of privacy, i.e. when the survey is based on computer-assisted personal interviewing or computer-assisted telephone interviewing, have proven to generate substantial underreporting of an LGB identity (Valfort, 2017 [1] ).…”

“…It causes lower investment in human capital due to LGBT-phobic bullying at school and poor returns, it reduces economic output by excluding LGBT talents from the labour market, it undermines productivity by impairing LGBT people's mental health, it erodes public finances through significant spending on social and health services to address the consequences of LGBT people's marginalisation, etc. Anti-LGBT discrimination is also detrimental to social cohesion through the persistence of restrictive gender norms that impede gender equality more broadly speaking and, hence, the expansion of social and economic roles, especially for women (Valfort, 2017 [1] ). The inclusion of sexual and gender minorities should therefore become a top policy priority for OECD governments.…”