Transcript P4.1

Working Group on Tendency
Surveys
Overview of Programme
United Nations Statistics Division
Starting point
 During the breakout session of the Scheveningen
seminar:
 methodology for sentiment indicator and the need
(and options) for harmonization have been discussed
 What is our focus? (avoid overlap with WG2)
 The sentiment indicators are the (100%) surveybased indicators
 Include both the conversion of qualitative multiple
choice questions into a single time series and the
computation of ad hoc indicators (involves choice of
the questions entering in the indicator, choice of the
methodology)
Follow-up steps taken:
 What is the current situation?
 What methodology exists?
(Guidelines)
 What are options for harmonization?
Current situation
 Worldwide, many organizations are
involved in compiling survey based
sentiment indicators
 Most use their own rules and methods
 In many cases produced outside the
national statistical offices.
Current situation
 Result:
 many practices (from the data collection to the
compilation of sentiment indicators)
 many of them non-transparent and therefore
not replicable
 data availability from private organizations is an
issue
 some of them produce important and
recognized indicators
 collaboration with private companies is essential
How do we get a better picture of
this situation?
 Conduct a world-wide assessment of
country practices in compilation of
sentiment indicators
 Difficulty:
 Who are potential respondents?
 Better picture for EU/OECD countries, but not
much known outside this group
 Use NSOs as starting point
 Assessment covers key question on
tendency surveys and indicator compilation
and dissemination
(results discussed separately)
Existing methodology


EC has harmonized methods for sentiment indicators
(questionnaires, coverage, timetable)
Results produced at Members States level and aggregate level on a
regular basis

still: data published at national level may differ from those published
by EC

OECD also provides guidelines
comparable to EC, but more general nature with room for country
specific requirements

While these data collection standards exist for EU/OECD countries,
existing methodology may not fit the needs of the rest of the world


Example: inclusion of the agricultural sector in the surveys

What modifications / additions to the existing guidelines are necessary
to make them more suitable for developing countries?
Question:
Harmonization
 We are not looking for full harmonization at this time
 Instead: sharing of best practices to extend the
existing knowledge past EU/OECD countries
consider a minimum set of international
requirements, in combination with country specific
needs
 Where is harmonization necessary for global
comparison?
 data collection (questions in surveys, number of
respondents, sampling methodology, classifications
used, etc.)
 compilation of indicators (average of specific
questions, which kind of average, principal
components, factor analysis, etc.)
 how to aggregate indicators (country weights)?
Where are we now?
 World-wide assessment has been
completed
 Review of existing guidelines
considering additional countries’
needs
 Establishing of knowledge base