Slaughtering statistics for all species (HU)

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

Compiling agency:  HCSO (Hungarian Central Statistical Office)


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: Eurostat user support

Download


1. Contact Top
1.1. Contact organisation

 HCSO (Hungarian Central Statistical Office)
1.2. Contact organisation unit

Statistics Directorate, Sectoral Statistics Department, Agriculture statistics section
1.5. Contact mail address

H-1024, Budapest, Keleti Károly u. 5-7.


2. Statistical presentation Top
2.1. Data description

The livestock and meat statistics are collected under Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 since 2009. They cover slaughtering in slaughterhouses (monthly) and other slaughtering (annual), GIP (gross indigenous production) forecast (semi-annual or quarterly data), and livestock statistics (once or twice a year), including regional statistics (annual).This template lists the questions constituting the quality report required in Article 17 of EU Regulation N°1165/2008 on livestock and meat statistics. 

This quality report covers the year 2019 and all the quality indicators already reported for year 2010 on the statistical processes used to meet the Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008.
2.2. Classification system

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.3. Coverage - sector

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.4. Statistical concepts and definitions

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.5. Statistical unit

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.6. Statistical population

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.7. Reference area

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.8. Coverage - Time

Not requested for reference year 2019.
2.9. Base period

Not applicable.


3. Statistical processing Top
3.1. Source data

See item 3.1.1. and 3.1.2.
3.1.1. Labelling of the statistical processes

SP2: Slaughtering statistics for all species
3.1.2. Data Sources for the defined process

Data sources used to meet Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 for the defined process in 3.1.1.

A. Main source
List of statistical units, frequency of revision (decimal years):  0.083
Institution in charge of data collection OI = other institution
First year of data availability by (current) source 2000
Type of source Ad hoc survey-Post-electronic questionnaire
If Administrative source, please specify
If Other source, please specify
Does this main source cover All the units (census)
If the main source is a source other than a statistical survey, please attach a short description of the source
B. Additional source of information
Additional source of information None
Institution in charge of data collection
First year of data availability by source
C. Additional comments
Livestock The respoNSI = National Statistical Instituteble for data collection from slaughterhouses is the Agricultural Research Institute.
Slaughtering
3.2. Frequency of data collection

Monthly
3.3. Data collection

Slaughtering data are collected by the Research Institute of Agricultural Economics (AKI) which is belonging to the National Agricultutal Reseach and Innovation Centre.


- Slaughterhouses approved by the National Food Chain Safety Authority.
- Data provider (reporting unit): entrepreneur operating a slaughterhouse dealing with the slaughter of live animals, enterprise.

Providing of data is compulsory by Government Decree. At present there are about 280 data providers of which about 87 percent sending their data regularly while the remaining part has very small capacity.

The method of data collection is based on self-declaration: - the data provider performs the data transmission in the ASIR system. Questionnaires -if necessary - are mailed and then filled in by the responsible person within the given economic entity and sent back by post or fax.

The process of verification and correction of errors continues during the recording of the questionnaires. Bug fixes include numerical correlations within the table and comparisons with other recordings. In addition, the person responsible for data collection compares national data with data from the previous period, and cross-checks with other statistics.

The questionnaire contains table on the number of slaughtered cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry and rabbits in heads, live weight and carcass weight.

Carcass weight

Cattle, sheep, goat, horse: the cold weight of the slaughtered animal after removal of the skin, blood, viscera, external genitalia, limbs, head, tail, kidneys, kidney fat and udder.

Pig: the cold weight of the slaughtered animal after removal of the blood, viscera, intestines, genital organs, abdominal crust, kidneys and diaphragm. Includes bacon and white goods!

Poultry: the cold weight of the slaughtered animal without feathers, blood, intestines.

Rabbit: the cold weight of the slaughtered animal after removal of the head, blood, viscera, skin, intestines, genital organs, abdominal crust, kidneys and diaphragm.

 

The data transmitted to Eurostat are covering those items which are laid down in the Regulation (EC) 1165/2008. The data also submitted to the FAO on a yearly basis.

There are confidential data in case of goats, horses and rabbits. The number of slaughtered goats is negligible, while the data on horses and rabbits are not sent to Eurostat.

The questionnaire contains table on the number of slaughtered cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry and rabbits in heads, live weight and carcass weight.
3.4. Data validation

Not requested for reference year 2019.
3.5. Data compilation

Not requested for reference year 2019.
3.6. Adjustment

Not requested for reference year 2019.


4. Quality management Top
4.1. Quality assurance

Not requested for reference year 2019.
4.2. Quality management - assessment

Not requested for reference year 2019.


5. Relevance Top
5.1. Relevance - User Needs

The main users of the data are the followings: Ministry of Agriculture, Hungarian Central Statistical Office, other departments of the Hungarian Central Statistical Office, Economic Accounts of Agriculture, National Accounts, media, international organizations (Eurostat, FAO), individual person.

The used definitions and requirements are following the recent Regulation of the Commission.
5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction

In case of slaughtering data user satisfaction survey is not carried out. The content of the questionnaire is based on Regulation 1165/2008 and has not been changed during the past decade.
5.3. Completeness

Not requested for reference year 2019.
5.3.1. Data completeness - rate

Not requested for reference year 2019.


6. Accuracy and reliability Top

See the items 6.2., 6.3., 6.5. and 6.6.
6.1. Accuracy - overall

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.
6.2. Sampling error

See the item 6.2.1.1.
6.2.1. Sampling error - indicators

See the item 6.2.1.1.
6.2.1.1. Sample design

Sample design to be reported for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

Questionnaire
Random sampling
Multi-stage sample
Clustered sample
Stratified sample
Stratification criteria
Location
Size of unit (animals/production level)
Legal status of unit
Specialisation (farm type/species slaughtered)
Total number of strata


Are some strata surveyed exhaustively? (Exhaustive strata)

% of units in exhaustive strata

100
% of animals/meat produced

100
Allocation method Neyman
6.3. Non-sampling error

See the items 6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3 and 6.3.4
6.3.1. Coverage error

See item 6.3.1.3
6.3.1.1. Over-coverage - rate

No.
6.3.1.2. Common units - proportion

Not requested for reference year 2019.
6.3.1.3. Coverage error for each process

Coverage error to be reported for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

Questionnaire:

Geographical coverage
All separate territories and only them 1
Threshold or other conditions
Small farms/slaughterhouses
Farms/slaughterhouses which have just started/ceased
Empty farms/buildings 2
Farms without milk quotas
Emergency slaughtering
Non-agricultural units are excluded (e.g. slaughterhouses or animal traders)
A2: Rate of over coverage (%)
The rate of over coverage is the proportion of units accessible in the frame that do not belong to the target population (i.e. are ‘out of scope’). 0
Further comments

1 Some countries may cover or exclude some specific territories, either remote or kept out of some studies because of their status, for instance French overseas "departments", neighbour micro-states, Mount Athos, etc.
2 On the date of the survey, some farms or holding can be provisionally empty, for instance for sanitary emptying, whereas they have normally an activity and take part to the frame.
6.3.2. Measurement error

See the item 6.3.2.1.
6.3.2.1. Survey questionnaire

Survey questionnaire for the process reported in item 3.1.1

Number of surveys already performed with the current questionnaire (or a slightly amended version of it)

120
Interviewers having already performed the same survey: is there a stable group of interviewers? Yes
Handbook for surveyors/explanatory notes: Year 2009
Hot-line support for surveyors/respondents?
On-line FAQ for surveyors/respondents?
Number of units participating in field testing (If relevant)
Average/normal number of days’ training for new interviewers
Questionnaire based on usual concepts for respondents
Cross-check of results
Pre-filled questionnaires
6.3.3. Non response error

See items 6.3.3.1, 6.3.3.2, 6.3.3.3 and 6.3.3.4
6.3.3.1. Unit non-response - rate

See item 6.3.3.1.1.
6.3.3.1.1. Unit non-response – rate by process

Non-response error for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

A4. Unit response rate in % 

89.57%
Whatever this rate is, do you need to improve it?

There is a need to improve this situation, in order to reach at least 90% response rate.
Treatment of non-response: Re-calibration
6.3.3.2. Item non-response - rate

See item 6.3.3.2.1.
6.3.3.2.1. Item non-response – rate by process

Non-response for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

A5. Item response rate in %  100
Whatever this rate is, do you need to improve it?
Treatment of non-response:
6.3.3.3. Unit non-response analysis

Unit non-response analysis for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

 Have the non-responses been analysed yet? Yes, for this survey
 Risk of bias due to non-response Significant
 Further explanations/comments
6.3.3.4. Imputation procedure

Imputation procedure for the process reported in item 3.1.

Imputation, based on previous data for the same unit
Other
Imputation is not used
A6. Imputation rate (%)    2
6.3.4. Processing error

See items 6.3.4.2., 6.3.4.3. and 6.3.4.4.
6.3.4.1. Imputation - rate

Not requested for reference year 2019
6.3.4.2. Internal processing error
No
6.3.4.3. Transmission processing errors

Transmission processing errors -Use of EDAMIS Webforms

 In the department responsible for animal production statistics
 At the central level of the organisation (in charge of livestock and meat statistics) in a specialised department responsible for data transmission
 At central NSI level (if different from the organisation)
6.3.4.4. Control procedure- processing errors

Under this item a "control set" is understood as a sequence of checks conducted by the same stakeholder/service at a given stage. Whether the sequence is interrupted has no impact if the data are not used or disseminated meanwhile.

Interactive on the interview/electronic form
Number of controls sets from field work to transmission to Eurostat 3
Cross-validation against Previous survey
Sample Survey for control
6.3.5. Model assumption error

Not requested for reference year 2019.
6.4. Seasonal adjustment

Not requested for reference year 2019.
6.5. Data revision - policy

See item 6.5.1.
6.5.1. Data revision for each process

Data revision for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

Revision policy
The data are subject to revision
Update of Eurostat data is covered
Number of revisions for previous reference year
The time series are revised after census results
The statistics previously published are revised after a census (rebasing)
A8: Average size of revisions
The average, over a period, of the revisions of a key indicator 
6.6. Data revision - practice

Not requested for reference year 2019.
6.6.1. Data revision - average size

Not requested for reference year 2019.


7. Timeliness and punctuality Top
7.1. Timeliness

See the items 7.1.1. and 7.1.2.
7.1.1. Time lag - first result

See item 7.1.1.1.
7.1.1.1. Time lag - first result for each process

Time lag - first result for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

Time lag between the end of the reference period and date of first/preliminary results/statistics (days)

30 days
No preliminary results published
7.1.2. Time lag - final result

See item 7.1.2.1.
7.1.2.1. Time lag - final result for each process

50 days
7.2. Punctuality

See item 7.2.1.1.
7.2.1. Punctuality - delivery and publication

See item 7.2.1.1.
7.2.1.1. Punctuality - delivery and publication for each process

Availability of data to national users for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

In comparison with transmission to Eurostat, the statistical results are usually available to the national users: Irregularly
The national legislation sets an earlier deadline than the EU legislation


8. Coherence and comparability Top
8.1. Comparability - geographical

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.
8.1.1. Asymmetry for mirror flow statistics - coefficient

Not requested for reference year 2019.
8.2. Comparability - over time

See item 8.2.2.
8.2.1. Length of comparable time series

Not requested for reference year 2019. 
8.2.2. Reasons for non-comparability
classification
8.3. Coherence - cross domain

See item 8.3.1.
8.3.1. Coherence between selected statistical domains and livestock and meat statistics

Coherence between selected statistical domains and livestock and meat statistics for the process reported in item 3.1.1. Choose the concepts which are the same in livestock and meat statistics and in the following other domains:

National accounts (Including Economic Accounts for Agriculture)
Farm structure survey
Administrative source geographical coverage
Foreign trade geographical coverage
Prices coverage of agricultural products
Further explanations
8.4. Coherence - sub annual and annual statistics

Not requested for reference year 2019.
8.5. Coherence - National Accounts

Not requested for reference year 2019.
8.6. Coherence - internal

See item 8.6.1.
8.6.1. Coherence – between concepts

Coherence between concepts for national livestock and meat statistics and those in Regulation 1165/2008 for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

Population (statistical units) Same
Population (coverage) Same
Reference period Same
Classification Same
Geographical coverage Same
Further explanations


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

Not requested for reference year 2019.
9.2. Dissemination format - Publications

See item 9.2.1.
9.2.1. Dissemination format – Publications by process

Dissemination via publications for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

Dissemination via publications on:
Press release
Specific analyses/specialised papers
9.3. Dissemination format - online database

See item 9.3.1.
9.3.1. Data tables - consultations

See item 9.3.1.1.
9.3.1.1. Public access to data for each process

Public access to the data for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

On-line dissemination: Public access to the data All
Website giving access to the data

http://repo.aki.gov.hu/3612/
9.4. Dissemination format - microdata access

See item 9.4.1.
9.4.1. Access to confidential data by process

Access to confidential data (if relevant) for researchers
9.5. Dissemination format - other

See item 9.5.1 
9.5.1. Publications available in English for each process

Publications available in English for the process

Publications available in English
If yes, specify links to the publications: 
9.6. Documentation on methodology

Methodological documents are availbale only in Hungarian.
9.7. Quality management - documentation

See item 9.7.2.
9.7.1. Metadata completeness - rate

Not requested for reference year 2019.
9.7.2. Metadata - consultations

See item 9.7.2.1.
9.7.2.1. Available metadata for each process

Available metadata for the process reported in item 3.1.1.

National methodology report - national standard Electronic information
National methodology report - EU standard Electronic information
Reference metadata (Recommendation 2009/498/EC) Electronic information
Definitions Electronic information
Classifications Electronic information
Quality report Electronic information


10. Cost and Burden Top

Label statistical survey

  The number of respondents (average) The average time spent by the respondents to provide information (in minutes) The number of occurrences of the statistical survey over the reference year The overall yearly burden on the respondents - TOTAL (in minutes)

Slaughtering in slaughterhouses

249

10

12

29880

 
The actual filling time - based on feedbacks and experiences - is approx. 10 minutes, but this does not include the time required for the data compilation, which largely depends on the technical and human background of the given enterprise / slaughterhouse. 
Data transmission can be estimated at an average of about 20 minutes.


11. Confidentiality Top
11.1. Confidentiality - policy

See item 11.1.1.
11.1.1. Confidentiality policy for each process
Systematically for some variables
11.2. Confidentiality - data treatment

See item 11.2.1.
11.2.1. Criteria for treatment of confidentiality for each process

Criteria for treatment of confidentiality for the process reported in item 3.1.1. (the following answers will be treated as confidential)

Results are published subject to the following rules:
Minimum number of statistical units 3
Maximum weight of the only dominant record11 (%)
Maximum weight of the two dominant records11(%)
11 Dominance thresholds: please fill in only the relevant percentage. The non-relevant cells should be left empty.
11.2.2. Indirect Identification
Results are systematically hidden
11.2.3. Indirect Identification comments


12. Comment Top


Related metadata Top


Annexes Top
Questionnaire - Slaughtering in slaughterhouses