|
For any question on data and metadata, please contact: Eurostat user support |
|
|||
1.1. Contact organisation | Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke) |
||
1.2. Contact organisation unit | Statistical services |
||
1.5. Contact mail address | Luke, Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 9, PO Box 2, FI-00790 Helsinki |
|
|||
2.1. Metadata last certified | 30/03/2022 | ||
2.2. Metadata last posted | 30/03/2022 | ||
2.3. Metadata last update | 30/03/2022 |
|
|||
3.1. Data description | |||
The data describe the structure of agricultural holdings providing the general characteristics of farms and farmers and information on their land, livestock and labour force. They also describe production methods, rural development measures and agro-environmental aspects that look at the impact of agriculture on the environment. The data are used by public, researchers, farmers and policy-makers to better understand the state of the farming sector and the impact of agriculture on the environment. The data follow up the changes in the agricultural sector and provide a basis for decision-making in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and other European Union policies. The statistical unit is the agricultural holding (farm). The aggregated results are disseminated through statistical tables. The data are presented at different geographical levels and over periods. |
|||
3.2. Classification system | |||
Data are arranged in tables using many classifications. Please find below information on most classifications. The classifications of variables are available in Annex III of Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 and in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1874. The farm typology means a uniform classification of the holdings based on their type of farming and their economic size. Both are determined on the basis of the standard gross margin (SGM) (until 2007) or standard output (SO) (from 2010 onward) which is calculated for each crop and animal. The farm type is determined by the relative contribution of the different productions to the total standard gross margin or the standard output of the holding. The territorial classification uses the NUTS classification to break down the regional data. The regional data is available at NUTS level 2. |
|||
3.3. Coverage - sector | |||
The statistics cover agricultural holdings undertaking agricultural activities as listed in item 3.5 below and meeting the minimum coverage requirements (thresholds) as listed in item 3.6 below. |
|||
3.4. Statistical concepts and definitions | |||
The list of core variables is set in Annex III of Regulation (EU) 2018/1091. The descriptions of the core variables as well as the lists and descriptions of the variables for the modules collected in 2020 are set in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1874. The following groups of variables are collected in 2020:
|
|||
3.5. Statistical unit | |||
See sub-category below. |
|||
3.5.1. Definition of agricultural holding | |||
The agricultural holding is a single unit, both technically and economically, that has a single management and that undertakes economic activities in agriculture in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 belonging to groups: - A.01.1: Growing of non-perennial crops - A.01.2: Growing of perennial crops - A.01.3: Plant propagation - A.01.4: Animal production - A.01.5: Mixed farming or - The “maintenance of agricultural land in good agricultural and environmental condition” of group A.01.6 within the economic territory of the Union, either as its primary or secondary activity. Regarding activities of class A.01.49, only the activities “Raising and breeding of semi-domesticated or other live animals” (with the exception of raising of insects) and “Bee-keeping and production of honey and beeswax” are included. |
|||
3.6. Statistical population | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
3.6.1. Population covered by the core data sent to Eurostat (main frame and if applicable frame extension) | |||
The thresholds of agricultural holdings are available in the annex. Annexes: 3.6.1. Thresholds of agricultural holdings |
|||
3.6.1.1. Raised thresholds compared to Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 | |||
No | |||
3.6.1.2. Lowered and/or additional thresholds compared to Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 | |||
No | |||
3.6.2. Population covered by the data sent to Eurostat for the modules “Labour force and other gainful activities”, “Rural development” and “Machinery and equipment” | |||
The same population of agricultural holdings defined in item 3.6.1. The above answer holds for the modules ‘Labour force and other gainful activities’ and ‘Rural development’. The module ‘Machinery and equipment’ is not collected in 2020. |
|||
3.6.3. Population covered by the data sent to Eurostat for the module “Animal housing and manure management” | |||
The same population of agricultural holdings defined in item 3.6.2. |
|||
3.7. Reference area | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
3.7.1. Geographical area covered | |||
The entire territory of the country. |
|||
3.7.2. Inclusion of special territories | |||
Finland Islands |
|||
3.7.3. Criteria used to establish the geographical location of the holding | |||
The residence of the farmer (manager) not further than 5 km straight from the farm | |||
3.7.4. Additional information reference area | |||
Not available |
|||
3.8. Coverage - Time | |||
Farm structure statistics in our country cover the period from 1995 onwards. Older time series are described in the previous quality reports (national methodological reports). |
|||
3.9. Base period | |||
The 2020 data are processed (by Eurostat) with 2017 standard output coefficients (calculated as a 5-year average of the period 2015-2019). For more information, you can consult the definition of the standard output. |
|
|||
Two kinds of units are generally used:
|
|
|||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
5.1. Reference period for land variables | |||
The use of land refers to the reference year 2020. In the case of successive crops from the same piece of land, the land use refers to a crop that is harvested during the reference year, regardless of when the crop in question is sown. For land variables is 12-month reference period ending 31.12.2020. |
|||
5.2. Reference period for variables on irrigation and soil management practices | |||
A 12-month period for variables on irrigation ending on 31.12.2020. Variables on soil management practices are not part of the IFS 2020. |
|||
5.3. Reference day for variables on livestock and animal housing | |||
The reference day of number of animals is 1.4.2020 within the reference year 2020. |
|||
5.4. Reference period for variables on manure management | |||
The 12-month period ending on 31.12.2020. This period includes the reference day used for livestock and animal housing. |
|||
5.5. Reference period for variables on labour force | |||
The 12-month period ending on 31.12.2020 within the reference year 2020. |
|||
5.6. Reference period for variables on rural development measures | |||
The three-year period ending on 31 December 2020. |
|||
5.7. Reference day for all other variables | |||
Not applicable |
|
|||
6.1. Institutional Mandate - legal acts and other agreements | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
6.1.1. National legal acts and other agreements | |||
Legal act Annexes: The Statistics Act (280/2004), adopted in Helsinki on 23 April 2004 Act on food and natural resources statistics (562/2014) (in Finnish) |
|||
6.1.2. Name of national legal acts and other agreements | |||
The Statistics Act (280/2004) Act on the Food and Natural Resources Statistics (562/2014) |
|||
6.1.3. Link to national legal acts and other agreements | |||
The link to the Statistical Act is in annex. Annexes: The Statistics Act (280/2004 in Finnish) |
|||
6.1.4. Year of entry into force of national legal acts and other agreements | |||
Year 2004. |
|||
6.1.5. Legal obligations for respondents | |||
Yes Annexes: The Statistics Act (280/2004), adopted in Helsinki on 23 April 2004 Act on food and natural resources statistics (562/2014) (in Finnish) |
|||
6.2. Institutional Mandate - data sharing | |||
Clear conditions for granting statistical authorities and researchers access to microdata for statistical and scientific purposes are stated in the Statistics Act (280/2004) and act on food and natural resources statistics (562/2014). These conditions are publicly available on website stat.luke.fi. Luke has a policy to share published statistical data as open data for the users. According to the Statistics Act Luke can share data with other statistical authorities taking into account confidentiality and data protection requirements. In practice Luke and Statistics Finland share some data including identifiers. For scientific use Luke can give individual data without identifiers. The microdata files are delivered to the users by secure channels. In a written decision the rules for using data in a secure way are defined. Luke gives access to microdata for certain period and after this period, the user has to delete the microdata and inform Luke when the data is deleted. |
|
|||
7.1. Confidentiality - policy | |||
Confidentiality is a base principle of statistics and assures the confidential processing of data provided by informants, and the Natural Resources Institute Finland has undertaken to follow this principle. Clear provisions for statistical confidentiality and data protection are stated in the Statistics Act (280/2004), guaranteeing statistical confidentiality and data protection. The statistical confidentiality and data protection of Official Statistics of Finland are guided by the recommendations of the Advisory Board of Official Statistics of Finland. The written instructions, guidelines and training in order to preserve and ensure statistical confidentiality and data protection are available for the staff. Luke has data protection and privacy policy and practices. Luke’s data protection officer assistance in general questions related to data protection. Commitments on the compliance with the provisions of statistical confidentiality are in place in Luke’s personnel working with statistics and are signed by all statistical staff in place or on appointment, as well as by external parties who undertake work on behalf of the Luke’s statistical services unit. According the Statistics Act (280/2004, section 24), a person who violates the provisions on secrecy, non-disclosure and prohibition of use prescribed referred to in section 13 shall be sentenced to a fine for violation of statistical confidentiality. A statistical confidentiality practices is publicly available in stat.luke.fi website. It sets out principles and commitments focused on statistical confidentiality that reinforce the trust of respondents, the public and other stakeholders. These practices are informed to respondents of statistical surveys in cover letters and home pages of these surveys. Provisions are in place to ensure that prior to the release of statistical information (aggregate data and microdata), statistical disclosure control methods are applied in order to secure statistical confidentiality. |
|||
7.2. Confidentiality - data treatment | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
7.2.1. Aggregated data | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
7.2.1.1. Rules used to identify confidential cells | |||
Threshold rule (The number of contributors is less than a pre-specified threshold) Secondary confidentiality rules |
|||
7.2.1.2. Methods to protect data in confidential cells | |||
Table redesign (Collapsing rows and/or columns) Cell suppression (Completely suppress the value of some cells) |
|||
7.2.1.3. Description of rules and methods | |||
The individual values of sums, averages or other data are not presented if calculated from figures of less than three farms. If the value of hidden cell can be calculated, then other cell will be hidden following secondary confidentiality rule. |
|||
7.2.2. Microdata | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
7.2.2.1. Use of EU methodology for microdata dissemination | |||
Yes | |||
7.2.2.2. Methods of perturbation | |||
None | |||
7.2.2.3. Description of methodology | |||
Microdata is not disseminated. Researchers can get microdata to the scientific research. This requires written application for the data. The researchers are not allowed to publish microdata. Information for the IFS is collected for statistical use only. The format in which the results are published ensures that no information about individual farms can be deduced. Farm-specific information is not surrendered to the authorities. Information can be provided to research institutions for research use, but only if the recipients and users adhere to the same confidentiality requirements as Luke. |
|
|||
8.1. Release calendar | |||
There is a common release calendar for all the Luke's statistics. Release calendar for 2022 was published at the end of the year 2021. This includes final releases for IFS. |
|||
8.2. Release calendar access | |||
Release calendar is available in the Internet: https://stat.luke.fi/en/releasecalendar |
|||
8.3. Release policy - user access | |||
All the releases are in the release calendar. Data users can order an e-mail notification when the statistics is published. |
|||
8.3.1. Use of quality rating system | |||
No | |||
8.3.1.1. Description of the quality rating system | |||
Not applicable |
|
|||
The data are disseminated at national level every 3-4 years. |
|
|||
10.1. Dissemination format - News release | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
10.1.1. Publication of news releases | |||
Yes | |||
10.1.2. Link to news releases | |||
https://www.luke.fi/en/news/the-majority-of-cattle-live-in-loose-housing/ https://www.luke.fi/en/news/a-third-of-the-cultivated-area-was-fertilised-with-manure-in-2020/ |
|||
10.2. Dissemination format - Publications | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
10.2.1. Production of paper publications | |||
No | |||
10.2.2. Production of on-line publications | |||
No | |||
10.2.3. Title, publisher, year and link | |||
Not applicable |
|||
10.3. Dissemination format - online database | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
10.3.1. Data tables - consultations | |||
The number of consultations of data table is not available. |
|||
10.3.2. Accessibility of online database | |||
Yes | |||
10.3.3. Link to online database | |||
10.4. Dissemination format - microdata access | |||
See sub-category below. |
|||
10.4.1. Accessibility of microdata | |||
Yes | |||
10.5. Dissemination format - other | |||
Not available |
|||
10.5.1. Metadata - consultations | |||
Not requested. |
|||
10.6. Documentation on methodology | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
10.6.1. Metadata completeness - rate | |||
Not requested. |
|||
10.6.2. Availability of national reference metadata | |||
No | |||
10.6.3. Title, publisher, year and link to national reference metadata | |||
Not applicable. |
|||
10.6.4. Availability of national handbook on methodology | |||
No | |||
10.6.5. Title, publisher, year and link to handbook | |||
Not applicable. |
|||
10.6.6. Availability of national methodological papers | |||
No | |||
10.6.7. Title, publisher, year and link to methodological papers | |||
Not applicable. |
|||
10.7. Quality management - documentation | |||
IFS 2020 data follows Eurostat's instructions. |
|
|||
11.1. Quality assurance | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
11.1.1. Quality management system | |||
No | |||
11.1.2. Quality assurance and assessment procedures | |||
Training courses Use of best practices |
|||
11.1.3. Description of the quality management system and procedures | |||
Not applicable |
|||
11.1.4. Improvements in quality procedures | |||
Not available |
|||
11.2. Quality management - assessment | |||
Not available |
|
|||
12.1. Relevance - User Needs | |||
Administration and researches. |
|||
12.1.1. Main groups of variables collected only for national purposes | |||
Only for national purposes were asked questions of the use of energy, manure management and amount of so called contract field (filed which in not rented out but someone else is cultivating it) . Use of energy was asked because we publish statistics about use of energy at farms. There was also separate module for number of pigs in order to avoid separate pig survey in December 2020. Altogether, the following data was collected for national statistical requirements:
|
|||
12.1.2. Unmet user needs | |||
User needs are met quite well. |
|||
12.1.3. Plans for satisfying unmet user needs | |||
Not applicable |
|||
12.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction | |||
Discussions with the users. |
|||
12.2.1. User satisfaction survey | |||
No | |||
12.2.2. Year of user satisfaction survey | |||
Not applicable |
|||
12.2.3. Satisfaction level | |||
Not applicable | |||
12.3. Completeness | |||
Information on low- and zero prevalence variables is available on: Eurostat's website. |
|||
12.3.1. Data completeness - rate | |||
Not applicable for Integrated Farm Statistics as the not collected variables, not-significant variables and not-existent variables are completed with 0. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.1. Accuracy - overall | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.2. Sampling error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.2.1. Sampling error - indicators | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please find the relative standard errors for the main variables in the annex. Annexes: 13.2.1. Relative standard errors |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.2.2. Reasons for non-compliant precision requirements in relation to Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Only LAFO and AHMM modules weren't census variables in the IFS 2020. All the land and animal variables are from the administrative registers and they are census variables in the IFS 2020 data. There are four variables which doesn't meet RSE threshold from the Regulation. Reason for this is that there are quite few pig and poultry farms in Finland and there are big variation between them. Because animal variables were census variables we didn't use number of animals as stratification variable. Because of lack of resources we weren't able to work more with post-stratification.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.2.3. Methodology used to calculate relative standard errors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The results were estimated with SAS software. Variances of the characteristics collected on the sample survey were estimated using the CLAN software developed by Statistics Sweden. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.2.4. Impact of sampling error on data quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3. Non-sampling error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1. Coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.1. Over-coverage - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The over-coverage rate is available in the annex. The over-coverage rate is unweighted. Annexes: 13.3.1.1 Over-coverage rate and Unit non-response rate |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.1.1. Types of holdings included in the frame but not belonging to the population of the core (main frame and if applicable frame extension) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below thresholds during the reference period | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.1.2. Actions to minimize the over-coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
None | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.1.3. Additional information over-coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Agricultural and horticultural register is updated every year using administrative registers. There was no over-coverage at all in the Agricultural Census 2020. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.2. Common units - proportion | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not requested. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.3. Under-coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.3.1. Under-coverage rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
There ar no under coverage. We update statistical agricultural and horticultural register every year. The frame was updated for the year 2020 before agricultural census started. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.3.2. Types of holdings belonging to the population of the core but not included in the frame (main frame and if applicable frame extension) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
None | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.3.3. Actions to minimise the under-coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The under-coverage error is so small that there is no need any actions. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.3.4. Additional information under-coverage error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not available |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.4. Misclassification error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
No | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.4.1. Actions to minimise the misclassification error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Effective use of administrative registers in the future also. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.5. Contact error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
No | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.5.1. Actions to minimise the contact error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
In the future we will collect more farmers' e-mail addresses in order to send e-mails for them. We already use SMS messages and they are very effective. Farmers sing in to the web questionnaire with strong identification (same what they use for bank). So they don't need any mail in order to answer to the questionnaire. However there probably will be also a letter in the future. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.1.6. Impact of coverage error on data quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.2. Measurement error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.2.1. List of variables mostly affected by measurement errors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The most important administrative source of data for farm structure statistics is Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS), where the date from farm subsidy applications is recorded. Farmers almost invariably fill in their subsidy applications meticulously, as they may otherwise face sanctions. Errors in land areas and livestock figures are usually minor and result from misunderstandings, lack of time, or inaccurate data entry. Information from other animal registers (bovine, pig, sheep and goat) is used as a source of animal number data. Farmers must inform the record keeper of any changes in their farm’s animal numbers by the due date. These registers are therefore largely comprehensive. Farmers found questions concerning their labour force and the farm’s other business activities quite difficult. Calculating working hours retrospectively was a problem, as most farms do not keep an account of working hours. In these cases, calculating the annual number of hours spent on farm work was sometimes challenging. In Finland, agricultural workers – and livestock farmers in particular – work more than 1 800 hours per year, that is, more than one person-year. In previous surveys, forestry work may have been partially included in farm work. From 2005 onwards until 2016, the number of hours spent on forestry work has been a separate item in the questionnaire. This time there weren't separate category for forestry work. However there was instruction that working hours aren't including forestry work. Even now, the classification of certain tasks is open to various interpretations. In some cases, it is not always clear at what point farm or horticultural production becomes further processing, that is, other business activity. Other questions for which farmers’ responses may contain measurement errors include irrigation, arable farming, horticulture, and livestock production. As this information may not be directly obtainable from registers, farmers may find it difficult to provide completely accurate information. This does not, however, have a significant effect on the final results. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.2.2. Causes of measurement errors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Complexity of variables Respondents’ inability to provide accurate answers |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.2.3. Actions to minimise the measurement error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pre-testing questionnaire Training of enumerators Other |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.2.4. Impact of measurement error on data quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.2.5. Additional information measurement error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not available |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3. Non response error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.1. Unit non-response - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The unit non-response rate is in the annex of item 13.3.1.1. The unit non-response rate is unweighted. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.1.1. Reasons for unit non-response | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.1.2. Actions to minimise or address unit non-response | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
None | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.1.3. Unit non-response analysis | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
We didn't carry out non-response analysis. There is only partial non-response because most of the core variables are from the administrative registers. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.2. Item non-response - rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
We don't calculate item non-response rate because it is impossible to know whether farmer should have answered some special questions or not for example OGA questions. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.2.1. Variables with the highest item non-response rate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.2.2. Reasons for item non-response | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Refusal Farmers do not know the answer |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.2.3. Actions to minimise or address item non-response | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Imputation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.3. Impact of non-response error on data quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.3.4. Additional information non-response error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not available |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4. Processing error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4.1. Sources of processing errors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Data processing | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4.2. Imputation methods | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sequential hot deck imputation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4.3. Actions to correct or minimise processing errors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cross check of results to earlier figures. Number of animals and UAA has been published earlier as a official statistics and figures has been processed. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4.4. Tools and staff authorised to make corrections | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Statistical department uses SAS software and only staff in the Statistical department are allowed to make corrections. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4.5. Impact of processing error on data quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.4.6. Additional information processing error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
13.3.5. Model assumption error | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|
|||
14.1. Timeliness | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
14.1.1. Time lag - first result | |||
Telephone interviews was finished on 30 April 2021. After that the data was checked and approved. The first preliminary data were published on 18 May 2021. The time between the end of data collection and publication of the first results was about seven weeks. For other characteristics the reference period ended at the end of the year 2020, after which there were five preliminary publications between May 2021 and January 2021. The time lag between reference day and first results was 5-11 months. |
|||
14.1.2. Time lag - final result | |||
The estimation of the time between the end of data collection and completion of the final data is 10 months. The estimation of the time between the end of the reference period of characteristics and the publication of the final results is about 15-18 months. Results were published in five sets in the Luke's web page http://stat.luke.fi/en/uusi-etusivu. There are no paper publications of the results. |
|||
14.2. Punctuality | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
14.2.1. Punctuality - delivery and publication | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
14.2.1.1. Punctuality - delivery | |||
Not requested. |
|||
14.2.1.2. Punctuality - publication | |||
There are no paper publications. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1. Comparability - geographical | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.1. Asymmetry for mirror flow statistics - coefficient | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable, because there are no mirror flows in Integrated Farm Statistics. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.2. Definition of agricultural holding | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.2.1. Deviations from Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 | |||||||||||||||||||
The definition of the agricultural holding is the same as in Regulation (EU) 2018/1091. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.2.2. Reasons for deviations | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.3. Thresholds of agricultural holdings | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.3.1. Proofs that the EU coverage requirements are met | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.3.2. Differences between the national thresholds and the thresholds used for the data sent to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
In Finland the threshold is 2 000 € (SO). There are no other threshold. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.3.3. Reasons for differences | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4. Definitions and classifications of variables | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.1. Deviations from Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 and EU handbook | |||||||||||||||||||
There are no differences in the definition of variables published on national level and the data sent to Eurostat. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.1.1. The number of working hours and days in a year corresponding to a full-time job | |||||||||||||||||||
The information is available in the annex. Annexes: 15.1.4.1.1. AWU |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.1.2. Point chosen in the Annual work unit (AWU) percentage band to calculate the AWU of holders, managers, family and non-family regular workers | |||||||||||||||||||
The information is available in the annex of item 15.1.4.1.1. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.1.3. AWU for workers of certain age groups | |||||||||||||||||||
The information is available in the annex of item 15.1.4.1.1. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.1.4. Livestock coefficients | |||||||||||||||||||
Finland uses LSU coefficients which are set in Regulation (EU) 2018/1091. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.1.5. Livestock included in “Other livestock n.e.c.” | |||||||||||||||||||
There are no "Other livestock" in any farm. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.4.2. Reasons for deviations | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.5. Reference periods/days | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.5.1. Deviations from Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 | |||||||||||||||||||
There are no deviations from Regulation (EU) 2018/1091. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.5.2. Reasons for deviations | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6. Common land | |||||||||||||||||||
The concept of common land does not exist | |||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6.1. Collection of common land data | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable | |||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6.2. Reasons if common land exists and data are not collected | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6.3. Methods to record data on common land | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable | |||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6.4. Source of collected data on common land | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable | |||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6.5. Description of methods to record data on common land | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.6.6. Possible problems in relation to the collection of data on common land and proposals for future data collections | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.7. National standards and rules for certification of organic products | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.7.1. Deviations from Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 | |||||||||||||||||||
There are no deviations. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.7.2. Reasons for deviations | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.1.8. Differences in methods across regions within the country | |||||||||||||||||||
There are no differences in methods across regions within the country. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2. Comparability - over time | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.1. Length of comparable time series | |||||||||||||||||||
The threshold was changed 2013 otherwise there has been no changes. Since 2013 the threshold has been 2 000 € (SO). |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.2. Definition of agricultural holding | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.2.1. Changes since the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
There have been some changes but not enough to warrant the designation of a break in series | |||||||||||||||||||
15.2.2.2. Description of changes | |||||||||||||||||||
Regulation (EU) 2018/1091 newly considers agricultural holdings with only fur animals. However even if our country raises fur animals, holdings with only fur animals are not included in our data collection because they do not meet the thresholds. The thresholds for animals are expressed in livestock units (LSU) and fur animals are not associated LSU coefficients. We did not add thresholds related to fur animals; there is no reason for it (fur animals do not contribute towards 98% of the total LSU). |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.3. Thresholds of agricultural holdings | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.3.1. Changes in the thresholds of holdings for which core data are sent to Eurostat since the last data transmission | |||||||||||||||||||
There have been no changes | |||||||||||||||||||
15.2.3.2. Description of changes | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.4. Geographical coverage | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.4.1. Change in the geographical coverage since the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
There have been no changes | |||||||||||||||||||
15.2.4.2. Description of changes | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.5. Definitions and classifications of variables | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.5.1. Changes since the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
There have been some changes but not enough to warrant the designation of a break in series | |||||||||||||||||||
15.2.5.2. Description of changes | |||||||||||||||||||
Legal personality of the agricultural holding In IFS, there is a new class (“shared ownership”) for the legal personality of the holding compared to FSS 2016, which trigger fluctuations of holdings in the classes of sole holder holdings and group holdings.
Other livestock n.e.c. In FSS 2016, deer were included in this class, but in IFS they are classified separately. Also in FSS 2016, there was a class for the collection of equidae. That has been dropped and equidae are included in IFS in "other livestock n.e.c."
Livestock units In FSS 2016, turkeys, ducks, geese, ostriches and other poultry were considered each one in a separate class with a coefficient of 0.03 for all the classes except for ostriches (coefficient 0.035). In IFS 2020, the coefficients were adjusted accordingly, with turkeys remaining at 0.03, ostriches remaining at 0.35, ducks adjusted to 0.01, geese adjusted to 0.02 and other poultry fowls n.e.c. adjusted to 0.001.
Organic animals While in FSS only fully compliant (certified converted) animals were included, in IFS both animals under conversion and fully converted are to be included. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.6. Reference periods/days | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.6.1. Changes since the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
There have been some changes but not enough to warrant the designation of a break in series | |||||||||||||||||||
15.2.6.2. Description of changes | |||||||||||||||||||
In FSS 2016, the reference period for livestock was: 1 April for pigs and poultry and 1 May for cattle, sheep and goats. In IFS 2020, the reference period for livestock was: 1 April
In FSS 2016, the reference period for labour force was 1 September 2015- 31 August 2016. In IFS 2020, the reference period for labour force was the 12-month period ending on 31 December 2020.
In FSS 2016, the reference period for irrigation was from late April to mid-October 2016. In IFS 2020, the reference period for total irrigable area is the 12-month period ending on 31 December 2020.
In FSS 2016, the reference period for arable land was 30 June 2015-1 July 2016 and the reference date for land characteristics other than arable land was 1 May 2016. In IFS 2020, the reference period for land variables is 12-month reference period ending 31.12.2020. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.7. Common land | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.7.1. Changes in the methods to record common land since the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
There have been no changes | |||||||||||||||||||
15.2.7.2. Description of changes | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.8. Explanations for major trends of main variables compared to the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||||||||||||||||||
Main time series discrepancies: Break in the time series for OGA_NRH |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.2.9. Maintain of statistical identifiers over time | |||||||||||||||||||
No | |||||||||||||||||||
15.3. Coherence - cross domain | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.3.1. Coherence - sub annual and annual statistics | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable to Integrated Farm Statistics, because there are no sub annual data collections in agriculture. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.3.2. Coherence - National Accounts | |||||||||||||||||||
Not applicable, because Integrated Farm Statistics have no relevance for national accounts. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.3.3. Coherence at micro level with data collections in other domains in agriculture | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.3.3.1. Analysis of coherence at micro level | |||||||||||||||||||
No | |||||||||||||||||||
15.3.3.2. Results of analysis at micro level | |||||||||||||||||||
In Finland we get a lot of data from registers. All the animals and crop areas are from agricultural registers. We use same data in the animal and crop statistics than in the IFS. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.3.4. Coherence at macro level with data collections in other domains in agriculture | |||||||||||||||||||
See sub-categories below. |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.3.4.1. Analysis of coherence at macro level | |||||||||||||||||||
Yes | |||||||||||||||||||
15.3.4.2. Results of analysis at macro level | |||||||||||||||||||
Coherence cross-domain on main area: |
|||||||||||||||||||
15.4. Coherence - internal | |||||||||||||||||||
The data are internally consistent. This is ensured by the application of a wide range of validation rules. |
|
|||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
16.1. Coordination of data collections in agricultural statistics | |||
The schedules of the IFS 2020 survey and other surveys were synchronised to avoid the situation where farmers must answer to several surveys simultaneously and there is also coordination that one question is asked only once. Luke follows the data collection principle laid down in the Finnish Statistics Act: existing register data should be utilised where possible, and no information included in registers should be inquired upon again for statistical purposes. The majority of the data for the IFS 2020 was taken directly from statistical register. For IFS 2020, we got farmers' education from education register and work done by farm worker from Farmers' Social Insurance Institution Mela. |
|||
16.2. Efficiency gains since the last data transmission to Eurostat | |||
Increased use of administrative data | |||
16.2.1. Additional information efficiency gains | |||
We used Incomes Register in order to define how much regularly hired employees worked. Incomes Register: https://www.vero.fi/en/incomes-register/ |
|||
16.3. Average duration of farm interview (in minutes) | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
16.3.1. Core | |||
Duration of collecting core variables from farms by telephone was 13 minutes. A big part of core variables were taken from the registers. |
|||
16.3.2. Module ‘Labour force and other gainful activities‘ | |||
Not available |
|||
16.3.3. Module ‘Rural development’ | |||
Not relevant |
|||
16.3.4. Module ‘Animal housing and manure management’ | |||
Not available |
|
|||
17.1. Data revision - policy | |||
Revision policy follow’s release guidelines of the Advisory Board of Official Statistics of Finland. These guidelines are set up according to European requirements and is publicly available. According these guidelines, errors discovered in published data are corrected as soon as they are discovered and information of major errors, and revisions will be published earliest possible and advance notice will be given when needed. The descriptions of revisions are published on statistic’s website stat.luke.fi. |
|||
17.2. Data revision - practice | |||
The data collected during the IFS was delivered to Eurostat as a single file. The information was validated by Eurostat, which sent Luke a list of errors and items to be checked. Luke then carried out the necessary changes and corrections. If any errors are later detected or specified, a revised file will be sent to Eurostat. Part of the data were published nationally. Once the data have passed Eurostat’s validation process, a final version will be published. Any corrections to published national data will be made according to the recommendations of the Official Statistics of Finland. |
|||
17.2.1. Data revision - average size | |||
Not requested. |
|
|||
Annexes: 18. Timetable of statistical process |
|||
18.1. Source data | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.1. Population frame | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.1.1. Type of frame | |||
List frame | |||
18.1.1.2. Name of frame | |||
Statistical register of agricultural and horticultural enterprises. |
|||
18.1.1.3. Update frequency | |||
Annual | |||
18.1.2. Core data collection on the main frame | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.2.1. Coverage of agricultural holdings | |||
Census | |||
18.1.2.2. Sampling design | |||
Not applicable for 2019/2020. |
|||
18.1.2.2.1. Name of sampling design | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.2.2.2. Stratification criteria | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.2.2.3. Use of systematic sampling | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.2.2.4. Full coverage strata | |||
Not applicable for 2019/2020. |
|||
18.1.2.2.5. Method of determination of the overall sample size | |||
Not applicable for 2019/2020. |
|||
18.1.2.2.6. Method of allocation of the overall sample size | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.3. Core data collection on the frame extension | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.3.1. Coverage of agricultural holdings | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.3.2. Sampling design | |||
Not applicable |
|||
18.1.3.2.1. Name of sampling design | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.3.2.2. Stratification criteria | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.3.2.3. Use of systematic sampling | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.3.2.4. Full coverage strata | |||
Not applicable |
|||
18.1.3.2.5. Method of determination of the overall sample size | |||
Not applicable |
|||
18.1.3.2.6. Method of allocation of the overall sample size | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.4. Module “Labour force and other gainful activities” | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.4.1. Coverage of agricultural holdings | |||
Sample | |||
18.1.4.2. Sampling design | |||
The Sample is stratified by unit location (NUTS 3), unit size and unit specialization. 1: 2000 – 25 000 2: 25 000 – 50 000 3: 50 000 – 100 000 4: 100 000 – 250 000 5: 250 000 - 99999999999 Unit specialization: 1: Cereals production and other plant production 2: Greenhouse production 3: Outdoor production 4: Milk production 5: Beef production 6: Other cattle husbandry 7: Pig husbandry 8: Poultry husbandry 9: Other grazing livestock 10: Mixed production |
|||
18.1.4.2.1. Name of sampling design | |||
Stratified one-stage random sampling | |||
18.1.4.2.2. Stratification criteria | |||
Unit size Unit location Unit specialization |
|||
18.1.4.2.3. Use of systematic sampling | |||
No | |||
18.1.4.2.4. Full coverage strata | |||
There are on full coverage strata. |
|||
18.1.4.2.5. Method of determination of the overall sample size | |||
We use optimal sample size method. |
|||
18.1.4.2.6. Method of allocation of the overall sample size | |||
Neymann allocation | |||
18.1.4.2.7. If sampled from the core sample, the sampling and calibration strategy | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.5. Module “Rural development” | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.5.1. Coverage of agricultural holdings | |||
Census | |||
18.1.5.2. Sampling design | |||
Not applicable |
|||
18.1.5.2.1. Name of sampling design | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.5.2.2. Stratification criteria | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.5.2.3. Use of systematic sampling | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.5.2.4. Full coverage strata | |||
Not applicable |
|||
18.1.5.2.5. Method of determination of the overall sample size | |||
Not applicable |
|||
18.1.5.2.6. Method of allocation of the overall sample size | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.5.2.7. If sampled from the core sample, the sampling strategy and calibration strategy | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.6. Module “Animal housing and manure management module” | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.6.1. Coverage of agricultural holdings | |||
Sample | |||
18.1.6.2. Sampling design | |||
The sample is stratified by unit location (NUTS 3), unit size and unit specialization. Unit size classes (SO): 1: 2000 – 25 000 2: 25 000 – 50 000 3: 50 000 – 100 000 4: 100 000 – 250 000 5: 250 000 - 99999999999 Unit specialization: 1: Cereals production and other plant production 2: Greenhouse production 3: Outdoor production 4: Milk production 5: Beef production 6: Other cattle husbandry 7: Pig husbandry 8: Poultry husbandry 9: Other grazing livestock 10: Mixed production |
|||
18.1.6.2.1. Name of sampling design | |||
Stratified one-stage random sampling | |||
18.1.6.2.2. Stratification criteria | |||
Unit size Unit location Unit specialization |
|||
18.1.6.2.3. Use of systematic sampling | |||
No | |||
18.1.6.2.4. Full coverage strata | |||
There were 162 full coverage strata. These strata included 339 farms. Total amount of strata was 773 including 45 630 farms. |
|||
18.1.6.2.5. Method of determination of the overall sample size | |||
The sample was allocated using the mean of a proportional and optimal allocation (Neymann allocation). The allocation variable was the economic size of the farm. This allocation method resulted in a sample drawn randomly yet evenly from all over Finland, and in such a way that the sampling ratio increased with farm size. For livestock farms, the sampling ratio was greater than for farms engaged in crop production, as variances in economic size for livestock farms were greater than for farms engaged in crop production. |
|||
18.1.6.2.6. Method of allocation of the overall sample size | |||
Neymann allocation | |||
18.1.6.2.7. If sampled from the core sample, the sampling strategy and calibration strategy | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.1.12. Software tool used for sample selection | |||
SAS |
|||
18.1.13. Administrative sources | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.1.13.1. Administrative sources used and the purposes of using them | |||
The information is available on Eurostat's website. |
|||
18.1.13.2. Description and quality of the administrative sources | |||
See the attached Excel file in the Annex. Annexes: 18.1.13.2. List of administrative registers used for IFS 2020 |
|||
18.1.13.3. Difficulties using additional administrative sources not currently used | |||
None | |||
18.1.14. Innovative approaches | |||
The information on innovative approaches and the quality methods applied is available here Eurostat's website. |
|||
18.2. Frequency of data collection | |||
The agricultural census is conducted every 10 years. The decennial agricultural census is complemented by sample or census-based data collections organised every 3-4 years in-between. |
|||
18.3. Data collection | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.3.1. Methods of data collection | |||
Telephone, electronic version | |||
18.3.2. Data entry method, if paper questionnaires | |||
Not applicable | |||
18.3.3. Questionnaire | |||
There weren't actual questionnaire at all. Please find the question in Finnish and English in annexes. Annexes: 18.3.3. Questions of the web questionnaire in Finnish 18.3.3. Questions of the web questionnaire in English |
|||
18.4. Data validation | |||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
18.4.1. Type of validation checks | |||
Other | |||
18.4.2. Staff involved in data validation | |||
Staff from central department | |||
18.4.3. Tools used for data validation | |||
SAS and Eurostats' validation through eDamis. |
|||
18.5. Data compilation | |||
We used Neyman's optimal allocation. |
|||
18.5.1. Imputation - rate | |||
We got almost all the main variables from the administrative registers. The only core variable which was collected from farms was variable WH_MAN_AWU_PC (Working hours by farm manager - % band Annual work units (AWU)) and the imputation rate for this variable was 13 %. |
|||
18.5.2. Methods used to derive the extrapolation factor | |||
Design weight | |||
18.6. Adjustment | |||
Covered under Data compilation. |
|||
18.6.1. Seasonal adjustment | |||
Not applicable to Integrated Farm Statistics, because it collects structural data on agriculture. |
|
|||
See sub-categories below. |
|||
19.1. List of abbreviations | |||
CAP – Common Agricultural Policy CAPI – Computer Assisted Personal Interview CATI – Computer Assisted Telephone Interview CAWI – Computer Assisted Web Interview FSS – Farm Structure Survey IACS – Integrated Administration and Control System IFS – Integrated Farm Statistics LSU – Livestock units NACE – Nomenclature of Economic Activities NUTS – Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics PAPI – Paper and Pencil Interview RSE - Relative standard error SO – Standard output UAA – Utilised agricultural area |
|||
19.2. Additional comments | |||
No additional comments. |
|
|||
|
|||