Pesticide use in agriculture (aei_pestuse)

National Reference Metadata in ESS Standard for Quality Reports Structure (ESQRS)

Compiling agency: Statistics Netherlands

Eurostat metadata
Reference metadata
1. Contact
2. Statistical presentation
3. Statistical processing
4. Quality management
5. Relevance
6. Accuracy and reliability
7. Timeliness and punctuality
8. Coherence and comparability
9. Accessibility and clarity
10. Cost and Burden
11. Confidentiality
12. Comment
Related Metadata
Annexes (including footnotes)

For any question on data and metadata, please contact: EUROPEAN STATISTICAL DATA SUPPORT


1. Contact Top
1.1. Contact organisation

Statistics Netherlands

1.2. Contact organisation unit

Environmental Unit, The Hague

1.5. Contact mail address

Henri Faasdreef 312

Postbus 24500

2490 HA Den Haag

2. Statistical presentation Top
2.1. Data description

See sub-categories below.

2.1.1. Main characteristics of statistics

The dataset is the second contribution of use of pesticides (plant protection products) in several crops of agriculture in NL. It is the second contribution of use of ppps within REGULATION (EC) No 1185/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 25 November 2009 concerning statistics on pesticides. For the 2015 -2019 period CBS has choosen to report on use in the year 2016. Based on an inventory in almost 60 crops use is reported in 32 crops as known within the crop production statistics. So data of NL crops are taken toegether as EU crops.

In NL the category of flowers and ornamental plants is of importance in relation to pesticide use. In for example the category of flowers and ornamental plants (excl. nurseries), which is one crop in crop statistics, 16 NL inventory crops are included. In another EU crop category nurseries 6 NL  inventory crops are included. But in lots of fruit and vegetable crops use is reported as it was inventorized so NL crop is EU crop.

Data of use of about 250 substances are included. CBS has published these data of use in kg active substances and area treated in total and per ha of NL inventory crop on its website, in StatLine; in two Dutch publications. CBS also publishes data on crop protection in Compendium voor de Leefomgeving (CLO; mainly Dutch).

Use includes ppps with chemical substances, but also those with biological substances. Use is reported according to the HARMONISED CLASSIFICATION OF SUBSTANCES (annex III). Quantities of substances used are expressed in kilograms. Areas treated are expressed in hectares.

CBS has experience with this statistics from 1995. But only the data of 2012 and 2016 are presented on StatLine in the same way.  The inventory has been done every 4 years. Before the harmonised classification became available use was distinguished to purpose of use like insect control, fungi control or weed control. Now that annex III is available a transition has been made to this classification.

The statistic focusses on plant protection, This means that biocides are excluded from publication. The national statistics includes also use of biological agents (macrobials) for crops under cover and mechanical control for all crops. But these additional data are not included here. 

2.1.2. Reference period of data collection


2.1.3. National legislation
Yes Name of national legislation

1. Besluit gegevensverwerving CBS. Article 11d. 

2. Besluit Gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden. Article 25a en 26. Link to national legislation Responsible organisation for national legislation

1. Statistical Office, CBS.

2. Ministry of Agriculture, LNV. Year of entry into force of national legislation

1. Actual legislation 2016 

2. Actual legislation 2018 Coverage of variables required under EU regulation

Data deliverance of use in kg plant protection products and area treated of each selected crop can only be obtained by an inventory which in 2016 became mandatory for professional users. See the national CBS regulation above. In EU regulation 1107/2009, article 67 it is regulated that data of professional use should be there at the farm level. It appears that the farmer is not always the professional user. If data of use are obtained from the professional usser then from kg plant protection product and by means of the national authorization database use per substance is calculated. The EU regulation does not prescribe the authorization number. So the authorization number is not always in the farm records. Divergence national definitions from EU regulation

No indications. Legal obligation for respondents
2.1.4. Additional comments data description

No additional comments

2.2. Classification system

The classification used for pesticides corresponds to Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1185/2009 ( of the European Parliament and of the Council.
The classification system for crops derives from the Annual crop statistics Handbook 2019 (

2.3. Coverage - sector

Agriculture, including horticulture, including indoor horticulture. Because data are obtained by survey, by electronic questionnaire, grassland is not included.

2.3.1. Crops covered by the statistics

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

2.3.2. Commercial non-agricultural uses of pesticides

Not available.

2.4. Statistical concepts and definitions

The data reported are the quantity of each active substances listed in Annex III of Regulation 1185/2009 contained in plant protection products used on a selected crop, expressed in kg. The area treated with each substance are expressed in hectares.

2.5. Statistical unit

Crop parcels of agricultural holdings. Parcels with the requested crop are taken together.

2.6. Statistical population

Agricultural holdings with the requested crops. No minumum size of hectares in addition of that they are included in de agricultural census.

2.7. Reference area

See sub-categories below.

2.7.1. Geographical area covered

The entire territory of the country.

2.7.2. Inclusion of special territories

Aruba-Curaçao-Sint Maarten-Bonaire-Sint Eustatius-Saba not included.

2.8. Coverage - Time

2012-2016. Use survey has been done every 4 years, which started at 1995.

2.9. Base period

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because it is not based on an index number of time series.

3. Statistical processing Top
3.1. Source data

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

Surveys SN among farmers.

Data from Agricultural census of 2011 and 2012.

3.2. Frequency of data collection

Every 4 years: so 2008, 2012, 2016.

3.3. Data collection

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes. The main method is a survey with electronic questionnaire, but in some cases it was poosible to respond via a register of use.

Two questionaires (in Dutch) are annexed as an exemple. In total 7 questionaires were used for subcategories of crops.

3.4. Data validation

Controls are done on desaggregated level of crop protection treatments.

3.4.1. Data validation measures
3.4.2. Target of data validation measures
3.4.3. Specification target of data validation

Not applicable.

3.5. Data compilation

We try to be as explicit as possible.

Aggregates of kg substances have been counted published as major group as well as the area treated. The categories of products end chemical classes have been calculated by adding up form susbstances. 

Unit. When detected other units like tablets, ampules ore grams/microliter have been calculated to kg.

Imputation of missing values within the 12 months has been done by using different weights in different months.

Experts judgement is done to decide whether respons is complete or not. When a farm is biological no crop protection over the whole year is accepted. In intensive crops like seedpotatoe or tullips no crop protection is not likely and therefore these responds are regarded a non-respons.

Weights used are calculation by an SN expert. Sample information has been weighed to number of farms in a region and the area with the crop according to the Agriculural Sensus in 2016.

Outliers at the lever of total kg subtance per ha have been detected and these data will not be used when calculating next sample size. Different sources are not used to combine input. If farms want to respond with registerinformation this has been allowed.

3.6. Adjustment

Not applicable.

4. Quality management Top
4.1. Quality assurance

See sub-categories below.

4.1.1. Quality management system in organisation
4.1.2. Specification of implementation

The proces is described (VIR). Including selff assessment by projectleader.

Special attention has been paid that NAW data (WBP) are protected and stay confidential.

4.1.3. Peer review
4.1.4. Main conclusions peer review
4.1.5. Future quality improvements
Further automation
4.1.6. Specification of quality improvements

Not applicable.

4.1.7. Additional comments quality assurance

No additional comments.

4.2. Quality management - assessment

Use covers 53% of sales in 2016. Where use is about 5700 tonnes a.i. (excluded fumigant metam-sodium, but this is only 6 ton in sales in 2016) sales is about 10800 tonnes in the 2016 period.

4.2.1. Overall quality
4.2.2. Relevance
4.2.3. Accuracy and reliability
4.2.4. Timeliness and punctuality
4.2.5. Comparability
4.2.6. Coherence
4.2.7. Additional comments quality assessment

Punctuality should be improved.

Coherence salea and use can be improved for several substances. Use of glyphosate is not captured well by the 32 EU crops.

5. Relevance Top
5.1. Relevance - User Needs

Data of professional use of plant protection products are relevant for policy evaluation. Also parlement asks for them.

The use data published so far respond the needs of users interested in knowing the (total) uses of plant protection products in NL at the higher aggregated level, which is the six levels of major group (Annex III of Regulation (EC) no 1185/2009 concerning statistics on pesticides). In several cases uses of the three smallest groups (Molluscicides, Plant Growth Regulators and Other pesticides) are taken together to have less complex graphics. Most users are interested in total use In other cases they are only interested in uses of Fungicides, or Herbicides or Insecticides. It is a disadvantage that uses are only know every 4 years. Users expect them to be yearly.

Users like environmental organization, neighbours and by standers are interested in kg use per active substance in certain crop parcels to know the risk of ppp used. 

Users like agricultural organizations argue that kg of active ingredient is a very rough measure with respect to environmental risk. They ask SN to publish additional information which give a better indication of risks from pesticides.

For use the productgroup is not yet published. It is not know if anybody waits on this information.  It appears that scientists are interested in the level of active substance. It is not clear if they are wating on the level of category of products and the chemical class. Also questions from scientists or government officials from other countries have been received, because they are especially interested in the Dutch case.

Also students and other people in society ask information of pesticides uses.

It is not clear if users are waiting for the publication of the uses by chemical groups or if they are mainly interested in de level of active substance. Because the information of the chemical groups is rather complex to communicate SN waits with publishing these information. 

Uses at the level of active substances will not be published by the Statistical Office Eurostat according to Regulation (EC) no 1185/2009 concerning statistics on pesticides. 

Because data of use are only available every 4 years and not in all crops they are less important for evaluating governmental policies than the sales data. In general terms user needs are enhaunced when use data are published at a high frequency, in a lot of crops, at a low level.

The statistical information is most needed for those users of pesticide information who do not have the information themselves. So no questions from farmers are received.

Information with respect to pesticides use is quiet popular in society. Agricultural organization do cooperate with the survey and are interested in the outcome, but it is very important for them to reduce the administrative burden. Therefore it is very important to use standard reports to inform society like Global GAP, etc. In some cases farmers let us know that the use inventory is only a disadvantage for them. Information with respect to IPM (chemical, biological and mechanical control) is of importance with respect to the policy like the National Action Plan. But information with respect to high risk ppp use is more popular than information on low risk ppps or mechanical control.

5.1.1. Unmet user needs

Not available.

5.1.2. Plans for satisfying unfilled user needs

Data should be published in the year after the inventory.

5.1.3. Additional comments user needs

Not available.

5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction

Data of ppp uses are used for evalution of govermental policy during two decades.

Environmental organisation, neighbours and byestanders want more public information at a low level of detail.  Even the level of active substance is not detailed enough. Now that sales are published on the level of productgroup (category of products) it will take some time to know if this satisfies user needs. It is not clear whether users are waiting for data at the level of chemical class. Perhaps toxicological scientists are. Views and opinions of the users are not regularely collected.

Statline publications with respect to use of certain active substances are quite popular. For example use of hormone threatening substances. But also high use in certain agricultural crops is quoted several times. In theory low use in certain crops should be interesting as well, but in general this is not the information which is quoted very much. 

Publications with respect to biological and mechanical control are not as popular as could be expected. Perhaps more should be done with respect to the communication about this subject. Its is not always easy for users of information to find the information in the statline database.

We assume that society (environmental organizations) would like to receive more detailed information on use and sales on the level of active substance or chemical class. But we also experience that lots of chemical classes in Annex III are not always very much used. For exemple the neonics discussion is until now not done in terms of annex III categories like PYRIDYLMETHYLAMINE INSECTICIDES and/or PYRAZOLE (PHENYL-) INSECTICIDES. So until now these categories are not very popular and in most cases not available.

5.2.1. User satisfaction survey
5.2.2. Year of user satisfaction survey

Not available.

5.2.3. Satisfaction level
5.2.4. Additional comments user satisfaction

Not available.

5.3. Completeness

See sub-category below.

5.3.1. Data completeness - rate

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics because in this data collection, there is no target on the number of data. Member States are asked to collect data on representative crops without stipulating the number of crops.

6. Accuracy and reliability Top
6.1. Accuracy - overall

The exact or true value of use in agriculture is only known by the outcome of the statistic. One can argue that use should be approximately sales, but one can also give many arguements that these are not the same.

Now that sales are published for each compound also use can be compared with sales for all of these compounds. Here we give 3 examples, one for fungicides one for herbicides and one for molluscides.

Use of the fungicide mancozeb in the 32 crop is 57,6% of sales in 2016. In the use statistic we can see that Potatoes (50,5%) and Onions (21,8%) are important crops for use of mancozeb. Use of the fungicide mancozeb in the 32 crops is 61,8% of sales in 2012. In the use statistic we can see that Potatoes (52,3%) and Onions (24,0%) are important crops for use of mancozeb. Why is 42,4% missing in 2016? Could be use in other crops of agriculture.

Use of the herbicide glyphosate is 26.9% of sales in 2016. In the use statistic we can see that use is reported in 29 crops so in only 3 crops use is 0. Use of the herbicide glyphosate is 24.2% of sales in 2012. In the use statistic we can see that use is reported in 30 crops so in only 2 crops use is 0. Why is 73,1% missing in 2016? Use in grassland is known in NL (not SN inventory) and could be added. But from other statistics on pesticides we know that use of glyphosate is also reported in weed control by municipallities and in railways. In general glyfphosate is a broadly used herbicide.

Use of the molluscicide ferric phosphate is 23,4% of sales in 2016. In the use statistic we can see that use is reported in more than 20 crops. Use of the molluscicide ferric phosphate is 27,5% of sales in 2012. In the use statistic we can see that use is reported in less than 10 crops. So use of ferric phosphate is increasing to more crops. Why is 76,6% missing in 2016? Could be use in other crops of agriculture.

If use and sales are available in terms of the harmonized classification, and it gives al lot of work to achieve this, then the comparison can be made on the level of major groups. It appears that Fungicides and Herbicides give the highest percentages of sales: 56.6% and 54.1%. So if we want to achieve the accuracy of the inventory we can better look at the fungicides. From another perspective we see that use is very low (22,5%) compared to sales in Molluscides. And here only 2 substances are involved. Looking at the most important authorizations it would be interesting to investigate whether important uses are missing. One reason can be that molluscicides are not sprayed but sprinkled.

If one wants to compare use and sales it is best to look at substances which are used in only one or in a few crops. But is is advisable if to compare use in a cetrain year with use in another year. 

6.1.1. Grading of accuracy
6.1.2. Factors lowering accuracy
Sampling error
Coverage error
Non-response error
Processing error
6.1.3. Specification of factors

Not applicable.

6.1.4. Additional comments overall accuracy

Not available.

6.2. Sampling error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes

6.3. Non-sampling error

See sub-categories below.

6.3.1. Coverage error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

In a total for agricultural use several crops are missing. But in our opinion almost 60 inventory crops should be enough to describe professional ppp use.

6.3.2. Measurement error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

The quantity of use can be to low because of treatments which are lacking. Some farmers tell us that they don't have any crop protection in the whole year. We accept his as thrue. In 2016 this zero use is included in the calculation of the sample size. Or is this processing error?

6.3.3. Non response error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

Farms are asked to contribute if they grow a certain crop according to the agricultural census of the year before the inventory. In 2016 about 60% contributed because the survey has been made mandatory. In 2012 only 30% of the farms contributes. Some farmers still refuse to cooperate. Some farmerss start to contribute, but at the end of the inventory, some periods within the year are lacking. This is adjusted by SN by using another respons area during the year, especially in the period that crop protection occurs in the given crop (April - July).

To go from sample to survey results of the agricultural census are used. The year of the sample has been in 2016 and 2012 the year before the inventory so for 2016 the AS of 2015 was first used to calculatate the size of the sample. In 2016 the farmers are asked whether they do or do not grow the crop which is inventorised. Thiis can also be coverage error.

6.3.4. Processing error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

6.3.5. Model assumption error

No model involved so not applicable.

6.4. Seasonal adjustment

Seasonal adjustment is not applicable to pesticide use statistics since all plant protection treatments associated directly or indirectly with the crop during the reference period are reported.

6.5. Data revision - policy

Important changes in de publication are mentioned in the tabel explanation as "Changes as of date".

If a statlinepublication shows big changes this publication stays available in the statline archive.

6.6. Data revision - practice

Provisional data of 2016 have been discussed with agricultural organisations before publishing the definitive figures. Of course the definitive figures remain te responsibility of SN.

Data published for 2012 have been revised because of a better methodology for making the national data.

6.6.1. Data revision - average size

Data revison has been done for 2012. 

We propose total kg a.i. over all crops per ha as key item.

Total use over all crops in 2012 is now 5880806 kg. Total area with use of ppp is 749398 ha. So use per ha is 7,85 kg/ha.

Total use in early estimate overf all crops in 2012 was 5772485 kg. Total area with use of ppps is 734939 ha. So use per ha was 7,85 kg/ha. 

So we see a change of 108321 kg (1,88% of early estimate) and 14459 (1,97% of early estimate). Resulting in no change isn use per ha with treatment.

6.6.2. Data revisions - conceptual changes
6.6.3. Reason for revisions

Better weights of the survey sample.

6.6.4. Impact of revisions
6.6.5. Additional comments data revisions

Not applicable.

7. Timeliness and punctuality Top
7.1. Timeliness

See sub-categories below.

7.1.1. Time lag - first result

19 Months.

7.1.2. Time lag - final result

19 Months.

7.1.3. Reasons for possible long production times?

Data processing takes time.

7.2. Punctuality

See sub-categories below.

7.2.1. Punctuality - delivery and publication

58 days for the use data 2016

113 days for the metadata use 2016 (this quality report)

7.2.2. Data release according to schedule
7.2.3. Data release on target date
7.2.4. Reasons for delays

While preparing use data 2020 it was not easy to find the time to deliver the 2016 use data and the corrected 2012 data make this quality report. Also becoause sales 2019 and the emtadata of sales 2019 had to be delvered on time.

Also courage is needed to give the answers to all the questions in this report and the annex.

8. Coherence and comparability Top
8.1. Comparability - geographical

Data are collectedfor Eurostat on a country level (NUTS 0). Therefore, the data are not comparable on a regional level. The geographical comparability between countries is evaluated by Eurostat.

8.1.1. Asymmetry for mirror flow statistics - coefficient

Not applicable, because there are no mirror flows in Pesticide Use Statistics.

8.2. Comparability - over time

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because it is not based on time series.

8.2.1. Length of comparable time series

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because it is not based on time series.

8.3. Coherence - cross domain
Major group Treated area 2016 Use 2016 Sales 2015 Sales 2016 Sales 2017 Sales 2018 Sales 2019 Use 2016 /Sales 2016
  (in ha) (in kg a.s.) (in kg a.s.) (in kg a.s.) (in kg a.s.) (in kg a.s.) (in kg a.s.) (in %)  
Total pesticides 710.507 5.673.564 10.026.744 10.786.068 10.587.722 9.423.832 9.294.971 52,6  
F Fungicides 472.085 2.757.150 4.413.702 4.871.063 4.725.614 4.294.507 3.900.534 56,6  
H Herbicides 664.521 1.484.928 2.880.901 2.745.753 2.901.786 2.978.199 2.738.787 54,1  
M Molluscides 15.975 4.493 19.692 20.006 29.642 10.806 13.650 22,5  
PGR Plantgrowthregulation 162.037 193.179 425.643 458.719 386.011 386.409 556.909 42,1  

Here we see (again, we started this overview at 6.1. accuracy) the data on use compared to the data of sales for total of pesticides and four major groups. So 52,6 procent of total sales has been reported as use in 32 EU crops. 

There are several reosons why 47,4 procent is missing. The 32 crops do not describe the whole agiculture and also non-agricultural sectors are involved in sales. 

For improvements it is beter to focus on the 52,6 procent which is reported. Wat is for example happening in Mollusicides which is a small major group which contains only two substances.

Use compared to sales for Molluscicides Treated area Treated area Use Use
Pesticide Ferric phosphate Metaldehyde Ferric phosphate Metaldehyde
  ha ha kg a.s  kg a.s
Sales 2016     17844 2162
Use 2016 for all crops 15627 604 4262 231
Use/sales (procent)     23,9 10,7

We observe that in both cases use is missing or sales is too much. We have investiged in which crops use is reported and we assume that use is not always reported, perhaps because this pesticides are not sprayed. These kind of analyses will be done at national level.

8.4. Coherence - sub annual and annual statistics

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because the data collection is based on a five-year period.

8.5. Coherence - National Accounts

Not applicable, because it has no relevance for national accounts.

8.6. Coherence - internal

Plaese provide a cropcode for indoor and outdoor crops so that there is no need to include indoor in outdoor. (strawberry)

9. Accessibility and clarity Top
9.1. Dissemination format - News release

A news release mentions in July 2018 the professional use of 5,7 milion kg chemical plant protection products in agriculture. This use is 3,5 pocent less than the use in 2012. De use per hectare with treatment has increased with 2 percent. The area with treatments has decreased with 5 percent. 

Contains 1 graph with use per major group (in 1000 kg), 1 graph with use per crop (in 1000 kg) and 1 graph with use per crop (in kg per ha).

9.1.1. Publication of news releases
9.1.2. Link to news releases

 A news release for 2016 use data (in Dutch) can be found on the SN website in the article

Agriculture uses 5,7 milion kg of chemical pesticides (

9.2. Dissemination format - Publications

No paper publications or online publications such as pdf files.

But yes electronic publications on crop protection are available in Compendium voor de Leefomgeving (in Dutch).

CBS et al. (2019) Indicator 0006, version 07. CBS, Den Haag.

CBS et al. (2019) Indicator 0560, version 03. CBS, Den Haag.

9.2.1. Production of paper publication
9.2.2. English paper publication
9.2.3. Production of electronic publication
9.2.4. English electronic publication
9.2.5. Link to publications

Use of plant protection products per crop (Gebruik van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen in de landbouw per gewas, 2012-2016 | Compendium voor de Leefomgeving (

Use of pesticides per active ingredient (Gebruik van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen in de landbouw per werkzame stof, 2012-2016 | Compendium voor de Leefomgeving (

9.3. Dissemination format - online database

StatLine is the online database with 2 relevant tables in theme nature and environment on professional use of pesticides. One table (84007NED)  is data for the major groups and one table (84010NED) gives the data per active substance.

9.3.1. Data tables - consultations

Number of consultations in 2020 for the table 84007NED is 719 and for table 84010NED is 498. 

Number of consultations in 2018 (second half 2018 so directly after publication) is 494 for tabel 84007Ned en 577 for table 84010NED.

9.3.2. Accessibility of on-line database
9.3.3. Link to on-line database

Links to two tabels.

Use of plant protection products in agriculture: by crop, by major group (

Use of plant protection products in agriculture: by major group, by active substance, by crop by active substance (,

9.4. Dissemination format - microdata access

Microdata of the survey are not accessable for researchers.

9.4.1. Accessibility of micro-data
9.4.2. Link to micro-data
9.5. Dissemination format - other

Not available.

9.6. Documentation on methodology

We do have a Short methodology description document professional use in agriculture (  on the Statistics Netherlands website. It is up to date. (No English translation available yet).

9.6.1. Availability of national reference metadata
9.6.2. Link to national reference metadata

Links to two tabels. Look at I for information like table explanations and topics/classifications.

Use of plant protection products in agriculture: by crop, by major group (

Use of plant protection products in agriculture: by major group, by active substance, by crop by active substance (, 

9.6.3. Availability of methodological papers
9.6.4. Link to methodological papers
9.6.5. Availability of handbook
9.6.6. Link to handbook
9.7. Quality management - documentation

VIR (the proces is described) is actual and available within SN. So there is no access for users of the statistic. 

9.7.1. Metadata completeness - rate

Not available.

9.7.2. Metadata - consultations

Not available.

9.7.3. Availability of quality report
9.7.4. Link to quality report

10. Cost and Burden Top

The inventarization of professional use of plant protection products is time consuming for Statistics Netherlands, but even more for farmers who have to deliver the data. Otherwise there is a lot of information mandatory available for hazard assessment of foodcrops, for registers of professional use. So farmers do have and should have the information. But they don't always want to share the information with a governmental organization like SN. The gains on the level of the individual farm are not clear. Until 2012 the inventory was done on a volunatry basis. Administrative data sources are used to minimize the burden on respondents. Because SN is executing a statistic regulation the survey has been made mandatory in 2016, which immediately resulted in higer response.

The costs of the statistic for SN are calculated on about 3 vte each year. In years of the survey, the year before and the year after labor costs are higher. In these years use of non-agriculture has been done. It takes some additionaal budget to make registerinformation avalable. This budget is increasing every year the inventory has been done. 

The survey is postal and mainly electronic and the range of detail of datacollection ihas been further lowered in 2016 by sending the form every quarter of the year. Though not all farmers do have a computer use of paper is lowered to a minimum.  In the annex it can be seen dat in addition to the survey register information is used in 2016.

10.1. Efficiency gains
On-line surveys
Further automation
Increased use of administrative data
10.2. Specification efficiency gains
10.3. Measures to reduce burden
More user-friendly questionnaires
Easier data transmission
10.4. Specification burden reduction

11. Confidentiality Top
11.1. Confidentiality - policy

Survey with national data. No confidentality involved. Data are only used for statistic information.

11.1.1. Transmission of confidential national data to Eurostat
11.1.2. Confidentiality according to Regulation
11.1.3. Data confidentiality policy

Survey. Not applicable.

11.2. Confidentiality - data treatment

No micro level output.

11.2.1. Procedures for confidentiality
11.2.2. Additional comments confidentiality - data treatment

12. Comment Top

Related metadata Top

Annexes Top
Example of questionnaire 2016 for arable crops
Example of questionnaire 2016 for vegetable crops under cover