SP1: Bovine register (1 June / 1 December; secondary statistics) (AT)

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

Compiling agency: Information requested in the metadata file on general questions. 


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

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions. 
1.2. Contact organisation unit

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions. 
1.5. Contact mail address

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions. 


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

SP1: Bovine register (1 June / 1 December; secondary statistics)
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): 
Institution in charge of data collection OI = other institution
First year of data availability by (current) source 2004
Type of source Administrative source
If Administrative source, please specify

Cattle database: The institution responsible is the Austrian Paying Agency (Agrarmarkt Austria – AMA).
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

Statement from the Austrian Paying Agency: Implementation of the cattle database in Austria

Agrarmarkt Austria (AMA) was entrusted with the implementation of the legal basis for the identification and registration of cattle by the Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism.

The system for the identification and registration of bovine animals is based on the basic pillars tagging, notification to the central bovine database, holding register, animal passport according to Regulation (EC) 1760/2000. These components are verified by appropriate on-the-spot checks.

The Austrian system of the cattle database was tested by the EC in 2019 (COMMISSION DECISION of 28 July 1999, „recognising the fully operational character of the Austrian data base for bovine animals“, 1999/571/EC).

Relevant legislation:

https://ec.europa.eu/food/animals/identification/bovine_en

Registration of cattle farms

Cattle-holding holdings must transmit data on the operation (including farm number, name of holding company, address of holding) to the central bovine database at the beginning of cattle farming. A separate registration of milk production is not provided for in the cattle database.

Tagging of cattle

Cattle are to be provided with official eartags. This ear tags must be used as means of identification. The issue of the Austrian cattle ear tags (for new born calves and in case of loss) takes place via Agrarmarkt Austria.

Due to the origin of the cattle and the age the following tagging rules result:

Cattle must be marked with eartags on both ears within seven days of birth.

Animals imported from third countries must be tagged with special ear tags under the supervision of the competent official veterinarian. These eartags are obtained from the competent district administrative authority (official veterinarian).

Animals from other EU member states keep their eartag number.

The tagging of cattle is based on the life-numbering principle, which means that cattle accompany the eartag number from birth to death in the member states of the EU. The number may not be changed.

Notification to the central cattle database

Each cattle farmer (farmer, distributor, slaughterhouse, collection center) must report any animal birth, cattle movement into or out of service, slaughter or consignment within seven days to the AMA Central Cattle Database.

The cattle keeper is any natural or legal person who is temporarily or permanently responsible for cattle, including cattle transport or the livestock market (collection center).

For cattle that are only transported and not stabled, there is no obligation to register. However, the transporter must be able to provide information about the whereabouts of the cattle.

Transfers between establishments of a cattle breeder are notifiable if these establishments are located in different communities.

Basically it is possible for all cattle keepers to record and process the reports via the Internet (http://www.eama.at). Farmers also have the option of telephoning or faxing or lettering to the competent district farmer's chamber. Any required forms can be obtained from the district farmer's chamber.

For dealers and slaughterhouses there is an alternative possibility to report by fax to the AMA.

A special form of the message is the movement of animals on pastures or pastures by the owner (chairman) of the respective pasture or pasture. Further information on this message can be found in the leaflets / manuals.

Holding register for cattle holdings

This is to be conducted according to a pattern issued by the AMA or electronically by the animal keeper for all animals kept on the farm. The following fields are to be listed: number, ear tag, date of birth, sex, race, arrival and departure date, date of slaughter or use, previous / subsequent owner, pasture, check marks. It is recommended to record the mother and father ear tag numbers for births in the respective calves, this facilitates the search in case of an error.

Changes must be made at the latest seven days after their entry into the holding register. The retention period is four years from the end of the calendar year to which it relates.

If a cattle holder has several establishments in different communities, he must maintain an inventory of each of these establishments.

Administrative simplification: For cattle owners, the eAMA access replaces the inventory

For cattle farmers who have direct access to the cattle database via eAMA, keeping a separate inventory is no longer compulsory.

On the spot inspections

The statutory provisions require on-the-spot checks to check the identification of cattle, the messages to the central bovine database and the inventory to ensure their accuracy and completeness. On-the-spot checks in the field of cattle identification and registration will be considered CC relevant from 2005 and will be assessed in the framework of cross compliance. Breaches in the field of cattle labeling may lead to a reduction in direct payments.
B. Additional source of information
Additional source of information Set of coefficients
Institution in charge of data collection OI = other institution
First year of data availability by source

2004
C. Additional comments
Livestock

Since 2004, following the Decision 2004/412/EG, the livestock categories of cattle for slaughtering and cattle for breeding are calculated by using recursive coefficients.

Since the end of the milk quota in 2015, the stock of dairy and non-dairy cows has been calculated using other administrative data sources e.g. data from dairies, the Association of Austrian Cattle Breeders etc. The administrative data are consolidated by the Federal Institute of Agricultural Economics, Rural and Mountain Research (BAB), which also subsequently processes the results (variables according to regulation 1165/2008).
Slaughtering
3.2. Frequency of data collection

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.
3.3. Data collection

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.
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

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.
5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.
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
% 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

Point 6.3.1.3.5 should be deleted or rephrased, since the milk quota system ended in 2015.

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?
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
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 % 
Whatever this rate is, do you need to improve it?
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 % 
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?
 Risk of bias due to non-response
 Further explanations/comments
6.3.3.4. Imputation procedure

Imputation procedure for the process reported in item 3.1.

Imputation, based on
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
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

0
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)
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

Reference day 1 June 2019: publication on 22 August 2019 – time lag 83 days.

Reference day 1 December 2019: publication on 14 February 2020 – time lag 76 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: 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

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
8.3. Coherence - cross domain

See item 8.3.1.
8.3.1. Coherence between selected statistical domains and livestock and meat statistics
Restricted from publication
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: Animal statistics
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://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/wirtschaft/land_und_forstwirtschaft/viehbestand_tierische_erzeugung/viehbestand/index.html

 
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: 

http://www.statistik.at/web_en/statistics/Economy/agriculture_and_forestry/livestock_animal_production/livestock/index.html

 
9.6. Documentation on methodology

http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/wirtschaft/land_und_forstwirtschaft/viehbestand_tierische_erzeugung/viehbestand/index.html

 
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 Not available
Reference metadata (Recommendation 2009/498/EC) Not available
Definitions Not available
Classifications Electronic information
Quality report Electronic information


10. Cost and Burden Top

Information requested in the metadata file on general questions.


11. Confidentiality Top
11.1. Confidentiality - policy

See item 11.1.1.
11.1.1. Confidentiality policy for each process
Never
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
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
There is no need to avoid identification
11.2.3. Indirect Identification comments


12. Comment Top


Related metadata Top


Annexes Top