1. Main outcomes of the group discussions in internet self-response
Facilitator: Patrice Mathieu, Canada
Rapporteur: Paolo Valente, UNECE

2. Minimal conditions for considering possible adoption of internet self-response
Literacy/education: the proportion of population that is illitterate or has very low education should not be large
A significant proportion of the population should have access to internet using a PC (desktop or laptop) or tablet
Smartphone is not practical to fill census questionnaire
Special facilities with PCs and internet could be set up in schools, libraries to facilitate internet response and provide support (useful also for the elderly, disabled)
Internet response could be adopted only in large cities
If conditions are met, then TEST and verify acceptability

3. Public trust towards NSI and data confidentiality concerns
General trust of the population towards the NSI is necessary to implement internet self-response
If there is high sensitivity with regard to data confidentiality, then acceptability of internet response should be tested
In most countries (but not all…) respondents prefer filling personal information via internet than on paper
Adopting internet self-response may contribute to give a positive, modern and efficient image of NSI

4. Step-by-step strategy
It is recommended to adopt a step-by-step strategy:
Use electronic questionnaires on laptops in small tests or small surveys
Move to internet self-response in test with larger samples, testing alternative strategies
Use in census with conservative approach
Use in census with aggressive approach

5. Data quality
In general, data quality for internet response is BETTER compared to paper questionnaires, thanks to:
Automatic sequencing of questions
Drop down menus
Interactive editing
Important to provide good contextual help function, particularly for “difficult” census questions
Provide support via toll-free telephone helpline, and social media (e.g. Facebook)
In testing phase consult respondents (cognitive testing)

6. Availability of address/building/dwelling registers
If registers are available, use data to mail out login and password for internet response, printed on letter and/or paper questionnaire
If coverage/quality of registers is not good, use them anyway and complement with letters/questionnaires delivered by enumerators
If registers do not exist, enumerators can deliver letters and/or questionnaires with login and password for internet response
Internet response can be used as main method in part of the country, and paper questionnaires elsewhere

7. Multi-mode data collection and impact on census costs
Adopting multi-mode data collection implies additional costs
Initial investment for internet self-response requires significant financial resources and expertise
Net cost savings should not be expected at least for first census, if step-by-step approach is used
It may be difficult to estimate the actual internet take-up rate at census, based on tests and pilot census

8. Conclusion - Advantages of internet self-response
Improving coverage (difficult to find respondents)
Improving data quality with minimum level of unknown and inconsistencies
Potential cost savings (if a significant take-up rate is obtained)
Smaller field data collection (fewer or no paper questionnaires required, fewer enumerators)
Improved image of NSI (modern, efficient)
More acceptable for confidentiality reasons (in most countries)
Possibility to complete questionnaire when is more convenient (applies also to self-response with paper questionnaire)

9. Conclusion - Challenges/difficulties of internet self-response
Long process for developing and testing data collection system and online questionnaire
Providing user friendly instructions for respondents and procedures for supporting respondents
Designing census operation for multi-mode data collection
Developing procedures for ensuring data security and confidentiality of personal information
Difficulty to estimate actual take-up rate of internet response at census based on results of tests and pilot census