LUCAS SURVEYS 2009/2012: Optimising comparability

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

© 2003 Prentice-Hall, Inc.Chap 1-1 Business Statistics: A First Course (3 rd Edition) Chapter 1 Introduction and Data Collection.

Advertisements

Has EO found its customers? 1 Space Applications Institute Directorate General Joint Research Centre European Commission Ispra (VA), Italy

11 july 2008 European Conference on Quality COMPARISON OF VALIDATION PROCEDURES TO DETECT MEASUREMENT ERRORS IN AN AREA FRAME SAMPLE SURVEY Laura Martino,

Metadata Models in Survey Computing Some Results of MetaNet – WG 2 METIS 2004, Geneva W. Grossmann University of Vienna.

DDI Methodology. Aims Purpose: To describe the study design specifications underlying the conduct of a research/business project. Possible coverage areas:

Joint UNECE-Eurostat worksession on confidentiality, 2011, Tarragona Sampling as a way to reduce risk and create a Public Use File maintaining weighted.

EFGS – 10 November 2015 – Vienna UN-GGIM: Europe Work Group A European Core Data François Chirié (France)

TURKISH STATISTICAL INSTITUTE Sampling Design of 2012 Global Adult Tobacco Use Survey (GATS 2012) in Turkey (Comparison with GATS 2008) Yılmaz ERSAHIN.

Chapter 1 Introduction and Data Collection

Provision of harmonized land cover information for lucas from the Finnish datasets Eurostat grant 2014 Provision of harmonized land cover/land use information:

Access to European microdata for scientific purposes

Regression composite estimation for the Finnish LFS from a practical perspective Riku Salonen.

The GISCO task force “Remote Sensing for Statistics”

Working Party “Cooperation on Land Cover/Use Statistics”

Short and long term strategy on Land Cover/Land Use information

WG Land Use and Land Cover

Item 5.1 of the agenda Preliminary results of LUCAS 2009 Part II

Item 5.1 of the agenda Preliminary results of LUCAS 2009 Part I

Pilot studies on the provision of harmonized land use/land cover statistics: Synergies between LUCAS and the national systems Norway Erik Engelien Division.

LAMAS Working Group December 2014

Some considerations on LUCAS

Nonresponse adjustments and calibration: a comparison between two methods to weight the Labour Force Survey Tania Borg Principal Statistician Labour Market.

State of play of labour market and other domains of regional statistics Items 4.2 and 4.3 of the agenda Gorja Bartsch Eurostat Unit E4.

Expert visit Bratislava, – Part 2

Working Group Land Cover and Land Use Statistics

Task Force on Labour Market Areas

LUCAS 2009/2012 results Optimising comparability and Quality Reports Item 4.1 Working Group for Land Cover and Land Use Statistics Bech.

Land Cover and Land Use Statistics

Integration of Territorial And Land Information

Italian situation in the following areas:

A SUMMARY NOTE ON REVISED GDP ESTIMATES

Eurostat E-1 - Structural Statistics, Agriculture

Developing European standards for victimisation surveys

Regional Labour Market Statistics

Sampling scheme for LUCAS 2015

Annual routines with chaining

3.6 Regional dimension of the poverty and exclusion indicators

2nd meeting of the task force on survey based disability statistics

New Regional Indicators

“Land Cover/Use Statistics”

Pilot studies: land use and land cover statistics

PRODCOM SURVEY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

Passenger Mobility Statistics 21 May 2015

LUCAS 2015 Achievements and Dissemination

The OECD STRI WTO data days 19 May 2009.

Provision of harmonised land cover / land use information:

LUCAS Task Force The way forward.

Point 3.3 of the agenda Future actions and strategy

Basic Sampling Concepts

The Statistics Canada population centre and rural area definition and the proposed European and Global version of the degree of urbanization: a short comparative.

Business Statistics: A First Course (3rd Edition)

Budget: ,00 € (90% Commission contribution)

Integration of Territorial And Land Information

Land Cover and Land Use Statistics

LAMAS Working Group 6-7 December 2017

Mapping Data Production Processes to the GSBPM

GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION OF PESTICIDE USAGE STATISTICS A summary

Urban Statistics – Methodological work

Item 5.1 of the agenda Preliminary results of LUCAS 2009 Part III

Improved Register Data Matching and its Impact on Survey Population Estimates Steve Vale Office for National Statistics, UK.

Local Administrative Units

Agenda item 5.2 Methodology

Land Use/Cover Area Frame Statistical Survey

Task Force on Small and Medium Sized Enterprise Data (SMED)

Kaisu Harju Finnish Environment Institute Eurostat March 13th 2018

Business architecture

2.7 Annex 3 – Quality reports

LUCAS long term perspective

Transfers in the Environmental Accounts

SMALL AREA ESTIMATION FOR CITY STATISTICS

Presentation transcript:

LUCAS SURVEYS 2009/2012: Optimising comparability LUCAS Task Force Meeting 25.03.2015 Eurostat, E4: LUCAS Team

LUCAS sample: two phase design Stable since 2006 Stratification Aiming at NUTS2 level estimates New regions added in each survey Fine-tuning in methodology (experience and feedbacks) Trade-off: improvements versus ensuring comparability Improve comparability of LUCAS 2009 - 2012 results

LUCAS 2009 and 2012 results Optimising comparability 3 WPs Improvement in the classification Area sampling applied with differences (thresholds and allocation) 3 WPs proposing proper imputation models for the areas not covered (e.g. using LUCAS 2009 observations for some areas not covered in LUCAS 2012). QRs New statistical tables

Classification change: Land Cover Harmonised criteria of coverage (10%) More restrictive definition of Bare-land (from a coverage of 50% to 90%) Exclusion of mire and swamp forests from land cover peatbogs and the contextual assignment of points to woodland In comparison with 2009, this explains mostly the decrease of Bare-land, due to the more restrictive definition and the swap from Wetland to Wooded areas.

Classification change: Land Use 2 classes suppressed (added parameter status) Hunting Natural reserve the suppression caused a redistribution of the areas of the different uses and impacted the comparison with previous year.

LUCAS 2009 and 2012: Exclusion criteria from second phase sample

PROPOSED APPROACH Separate treatment of the different modules Combining estimation with modelling 2009 only elevation 2012: elevation + accessibility < 1000m 1000-1500 > 1500m

Main issues addressed

Weighting factor [direct and calibrated estimator] Direct: inverse of selection probability Post – Calibration Elevation class: 0-300m 301-600m 601-900m >900 NUTS2¦¦strata 1677 NUTS1¦¦elevation 267 NUTS0¦¦strata¦¦elevation 531

Results 8 (total area)+ 8 (area < =1500) results For each year, 2009 2012 Starting from different input data set: Base and "projected w/t-1, t observation" Direct and calibration estimator Same procedure excluding from points > 1500 [open issue: how to estimate area above 1500 m; is this kind of data vailable at national level] 8 (total area)+ 8 (area < =1500) results Ongoing assessment of best approach