SP5: SlaughteringOther Slaughtering Admin and Survey data collection (IE)

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

Compiling agency: Central Statistics 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

Central Statistics Office
1.2. Contact organisation unit

Agricultural Accounts and Production Section
1.5. Contact mail address

Agricultural Accounts & Production Section, Central Statistics Office, Skehard Road, Blackrock, Cork, Ireland,

T12 X00E.


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

SP5 : SlaughteringOther Slaughtering Admin and Survey data collection
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): 

All slaughtering establishments in Ireland that are approved by our Ministry of Agriculture, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM), for the slaughter of poultry, cattle, sheep and pigs. DAFM are responsible for slaughtering establishments that account for all poultry slaughtering, 94% of total cattle slaughterings, 92% of sheep slaughterings and 98% of pig slaughterings. We are not required to submit annual returns. Our monthly data are subject to revisions as additional data/revised data is submitted by our data providers. All revisions to monthly data are submitted with the following month's return. Finalised data is normally submitted within 0.33 of a year of the relevant return date.
Institution in charge of data collection NSI = National Statistical Institute
First year of data availability by (current) source

1975
Type of source Administrative source
If Administrative source, please specify

Data held by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine (DAFM) on the number and weight of cattle slaughtered in the main cattle slaughtering houses in Ireland, the number of poultry and pigs slaughtered from the main poultry and pig slaughtering establishments in Ireland and the number and weight of sheep slaughtered in the main sheep slaughtering houses in Ireland. This data is submitted on a weekly basis by all slaughtering houses under the auspices of DAFM as is used by DAFM for their own internal purposes
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

This data is collected weekly by DAFM. All Slaughtering houses are required to submit weekly reports to DAFM on the number and category of all slaughtering that occurred on their premises. This is then used by DAFM for their own internal purposes including their Meat and Milk policy unit, Testing Labs etc.

B. Additional source of information
Additional source of information Other administrative source
Institution in charge of data collection NSI = National Statistical Institute
First year of data availability by source

1975
C. Additional comments
Livestock
Slaughtering

While DAFM provides us with both the weight and number of cattle and sheep slaughtered in the slaughtering houses under their control, they only provide us with the number of pigs and poultry slaughtered. To estimate the carcass weight of pigs, the CSO surveys the main pig slaughtering establishments under the auspice of DAFM. The sampled establishments accounted for 69.3% of total number of pigs slaughtered in DAFM approved premises. The carcass weight of slaughtered poultry is based on experts' estimates of the average weight of the various categories of slaughtered poultry. Any slaughtering houses which are not covered by DAFM are covered by the monthly returns received from our Local Government Authorities (LAs). These LAs provide us with monthly returns covering the number and carcass weight of all cattle, sheep and pigs slaughtered by these remaining slaughtering houses.
3.2. Frequency of data collection

Data from our Local Authorities (our regional governments) are received monthly for Cattle, Pigs and Sheep. DAFM send monthly data for Cattle and weekly data for sheep and pigs. Pig weights from the selected slaughtering establishments are collected monthly. 
3.3. Data collection

The data returned to the CSO is administrative data collected by both DAFM and Local Authorities (LAs). LAs submit their monthly slaughtering data using an eform. We include a link to the eform when issuing emails requesting the monthly data. (See attached link: https://eforms.cso.ie/public/slaughterings.htm ).

DAFM submits weekly returns for pigs and sheep and monthly returns for cattle on an excel spreadsheets.

In relation to cattle, DAFM provides us with two spreadsheets. One spreadsheet contains the monthly number of cattle slaughtered, with individual data provided for young bulls, bulls, steers, cows heifers and veal. This data is based on a census of all slaughtering establishments under their control. They send us a separate spreadsheet with the average weighted weight for young bulls, bulls, steers, cows and heifers. To estimate the weight of slaughtered veal, we use data on the average weight of veal provided by our National Farm Advisory body, Teagasc. DAFM also send us monthly electronic returns with the number of poultry slaughtered broken into the required classifications.

For pigs, DAFM provide us with weekly data on the total number of pigs slaughtered in DAFM approved pig slaughtering establishments, broken down into Bacon, Pork, Sows and Boars. Each month, the CSO samples a number of DAFM approved pig slaughtering houses, requesting data on the total number and weight of pigs slaughtered broken down into Bacon and Pork, Sows and Boars. These sampled establishments accounted for 69.3% of the total number of pigs slaughtered in 2019 by DAFM approved establishments. We use this data to calculate the average carcass weight of these 4 categories of pigs and use this to estimate the total carcass weight of all pigs slaughtered in DAFM approved slaughtering establishments. 

 

Re Sheep: DAFM send us two spreadsheets weekly, one showing the weekly and annual cumulative total number of sheep slaughtered broken down into a) Lamb/Hoggets, b) Spring Lamb, c) Ewes & Rams and d) Light Lambs. The other spreadsheet contains the average weight, based on a sample of sheep slaughtering factories, of heavy lambs and hoggets having a carcass weight of 13 to 21.5 kgs. To estimate the carcass weight of rams and ewes we use an estimated average weight received from our national experts.

 
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 data collected is to meet the needs of both the EU and national users. Our main national users are DAFM, Teagasc and Bord Bia. 
5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction

While we have never conducted a formal survey of user satisfaction, we are in regular contact with our main users and hold an annual meeting to which all our main users are invited. Based on feedback received from users, they are satisfied with both the quality and quantity of data provided on livestock slaughterings.
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

We are satisfied that the overall accuracy of our slaughtering data is good. Data on the number of livestock slaughtered is based on administrative data held by DAFM and LAs. While the total carcass weight of slaughtered cattle and sheep is based on weighted average weights from a sample of slaughtering houses, in all cases they are based on a large representative sample of the relevant slaughtering houses with coverage of approximately 70% of the total number of slaughterings in Ireland. In cases where we don't survey (e.g. average carcass weights of Ewes/rams, veal and poultry), our estimated carcass weights are based on estimates of the average carcass weight of the relevant animal that we received from experts working in the industry.
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
% of animals/meat produced
Allocation method
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

See item 6.3.1.3
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’).
Further comments

All slaughtering establishments in Ireland are obliged to register with the Irish Food Safety Authority who in turn assigns responsibility for the inspection of these establishments to either DAFM or an LA. When DAFM and LAs collect data on the number and weight of animals slaughtered in these establishments, no thresholds are applied and it is this administrative data that we use to complie our monthly livestock slaughtering statistics. As there are no thresholds applied by them, we are therefore confident that over or under coverage is not an issue for our monthly Livestock Slaughtering data. In relation to slaughtering that takes place other than in slaughtering houses, experts have informed us that this is minimal and as a result, when returning our annual data we set the values equal to zero. 

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)
Interviewers having already performed the same survey: is there a stable group of interviewers? Don't know or NR (No response)
Handbook for surveyors/explanatory notes: Year
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

Not Relevant
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 %  100
Whatever this rate is, do you need to improve it?

No. Within 4 months of the end of the relevant reference period we receive a 100% response rate.
Treatment of non-response:
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 % 

As all slaughtering houses are subject to approval by our food safety authority (FSAI) and are subject to regular inspection, we expect and receive 100% responses. While it may take up to 4 months to get all our returns, as we receive them we update our returns to reflect these revisions and substitute imputed data with actual data.
Whatever this rate is, do you need to improve it?
Treatment of non-response: Imputation
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? No
 Risk of bias due to non-response Proved null
 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 (%)   
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 change
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 1
Cross-validation against Other source
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

We normally have an average of 3 revisions for each monthly return as data is received from previous non respondents for whom we had used imputed data originally.
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 

The average size of a revision is very small - approximately 1% of the relevant total.
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) Restricted from publication
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

While the initial results are published 28 days after the end of the reference month, the initial results would include imputed data for non respondent LAs. Normally, all respondents would have returned within 110 days of the end of the reference period and published within 127 days of the end of the reference period.
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: At about the same time
The national legislation sets an earlier deadline than the EU legislation


8. Coherence and comparability Top
8.1. Comparability - geographical

We are not aware of issues with geographical comparability.
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
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) coverage
Farm structure survey coverage
Administrative source statistical units
reference period
classification
coverage
geographical coverage
Foreign trade reference period
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: Agricultural statistics
Press release
Specific analyses/specialised papers


Annexes:
CSO's Monthly Livestock Slaughterings Release
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 Main results
Website giving access to the data

The data on livestock slaughtering, excluding poultry which is not published in order to protect confidentiality, is published on the CSO's website www.cso.ie


Annexes:
CSO's Monthly Livestock Slaughtering Release
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: 

https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/agriculture/livestockslaughterings/
9.6. Documentation on methodology

Documentation on the methodology used to compile our monthly 'Livestock Slaughterings' release is available on the cso website at:

https://www.cso.ie/en/methods/agricultureandfishing/livestockslaughterings/
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) Paper document
Definitions Paper document
Classifications Paper document
Quality report Electronic information


10. Cost and Burden Top

Every effort is made to reduce the cost and burden of data collection on respondents. While we do not collect data from them on the cost of providing data to us, we aim to minimise the cost and burden by using all available administrative data sources and keeping data requests to a minimum. We issue just three surveys as part of the livestock slaughtering data, all issued electronically. One is a census of all LAs, requesting that they supply us with their administrative data on livestock slaughterings. The other is to DAFM, who again provide us with the administrative data that they collect for their own purposes. The third survey is issued to just 3 pig slaughtering establishments who provide us with data that that they collect for their own administrative purposes. No superfluous data is requested from any of our data providers.


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 5
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