Eurostat Results from the TEST EGR with respect to Inward and Outward FATS populations (2011)

Eurostat Agenda  Objective of the TEST  Quality indicators on micro data  Structure of the test, 2 topics  Results on Inward and on Outward FATS  Some conclusions – next plans

Eurostat General objectives Scope of the EuroGroups Register To offer European statistical compilers coordinated frame populations for statistics on globalisation Vision for EGR Data Quality Management An integrated process including statistical users to input the best available information into the EGR The ultimate success of the EGR project is dependent on the quality of the frame

Eurostat Objectives of the TEST Test the quality of the EGR 2011 as a statistical frame population vs. Inward and Outward FATS 2011 Establish cooperation between BR and FATS Improve the capacity of BR staff vs. users’ needs Support I and O FATS compilers to use EGR Topic 1 EGR 2011 / Inward FATS 2011 Topic 2 EGR 2011 / Outward FATS 2011

Eurostat Statistical frame quality indicators 1/2 Across different sources (one is considered as benckmark) E.g. EGR vs. Inward – Outward FATS populations Across different countries E.g. Mirror exercises Inward vs. Outward Over time EGR longitudinal analysis Statistical frame - different dimensions:

Eurostat Statistical frame quality indicators 2/2 Macro – data aggregated at NACE Division, by Size class, for Geographic areas, etc. Meso – clusters of data Micro – single unit (micro data linkage necessary) Different level of data aggregation:

Eurostat Statistical frame quality terminology Completeness: a SBR is complete if it contains all units in the target population Coverage: SBR coverage defines the target population in term of size and activity (quality of coverage can be set differently according to users) Accuracy: a SBR is accurate if it correctly reflect reality (characteristics)

Eurostat Structure of the Test - Inward Definition of the populations EGR country specific Frame 2011: all resident units under foreign UCI National IFATS population: population for IFATS used for survey, with values of UCI corrected during the survey (only not resident UCI) and used for the publication of the final statistics (ref. year 2011). Methodology to compare the two populations Micro level based (units merged by a common key) Countries of UCI compared for the units in common

Eurostat Topic 1 I-Fats 2011 A E B C Z (country-UCI correct) (country-UCI wrong) D (UCI =) (UCI ≠) EGR Frame 2011 (country-UCI correct) RESULTS 1 - Completeness of EGR = (B+C)/(B+C+D) #DIV/0! 2 - Accuracy of UCI in EGR = (B)/(B+C) #DIV/0! 3 - Coverage of EGR by country of UCI = F/G SEE SHEET EMPL UCI Final IFATS population Link resident units at micro level COUNTRY of UCI, not exact UCI EGR/I-FATS

Eurostat Definition of the populations to be compared EGR country specific Frame 2011: all resident UCI National Outward FATS population: resident UCIs used at the beginning of the survey and corrected after the survey Methodology to compare the two populations Micro level based (resident UCI merged by a common key) Exact UCI compared Structure of the Test - Outward

Eurostat Topic 2 EGR Frame 2011O-Fats A D B Z (UCI correct) (UCI wrong) C E (UCI =) (UCI correct) (UCI wrong) RESULTS Indicator on the frame population of units (UCI) - % value 1 - Completeness of EGR UCIs = (B)/(B+C) #DIV/0! Indicators on the countries of affiliates of the UCIs only for subset (B) - % value 2 - Completeness of countries of affiliates in extra EU27 = (F∩G)/[(F+G)-(F∩G)] #DIV/0! 3 - Completeness of countries of affiliates in EU27 = (H∩I)/[(H+I)- (H∩I)] #DIV/0! Initial OFATS population Link UCI at micro level Some MS have Reporting Units different from UCI > from REP to UCI and then link to EGR UCI EGR/O-FATS

Eurostat RESULTS: Topic 1 EGR/Inward FATS

Eurostat Participating countries ESSnet countries: IT, NL, PT Countries with individual Grants: FI, NO, RO, SE Volunteer countries: LV, SI Total: 9 countries

Eurostat

RESULTS: Topic 2 EGR/Outward FATS

Eurostat Participating countries ESSnet countries: IT, NL Countries with individual Grants: FI, NO, RO, SE Volunteer countries: LV Total: 7 countries

Eurostat

INWARD Completeness measured at micro level LOW (≈ 40%) Accuracy for the units linked HIGH (≈ 85%) Coverage on employment VERY HIGH (>95%)  Problem of linkage (Set A vs D)  Units in EGR 2011 are all large  It doesn't mean that EGR covers ALL large units (because we should measure employment of D)  But it is unlikely that very large units are missed (EGR validation, profiling) Conclusions

Eurostat Conclusions OUTWARD Completeness of UCI VERY LOW (≈ 20%) Completeness of countries IN EU VERY HIGH (≈ 99%) Completeness of countries OUT EU HIGH (≈ 70%)  Problem in the definition of the lists of UCIs  Methodological differences for choosing UCI  MORE DIFFICULT analysis, because we asked for the same EXACT UCI

Eurostat What next? Continue: we expect improvements with EGR 2.0 Add other indicators? Inward: Empl.A/Empl.D Outward: N. countries affiliates not in B Add metadata to the results? Publish the results of this test?

Eurostat DISCUSSION with MS on the results of the tests: Time and resources used? How was the cooperation between BR and FATS (useful, difficult, etc.)? Main difficulties of the tests? Any suggestions how to improve the tests?