Statistical Service of Cyprus

CY-1444

Nicosia

Cyprus 

Article 11.(2) The officers or the other persons referred to in subsection (1) have the obligation to inform the person from whom the provision of data is required about the conduct of a survey or work by virtue of Law, the purpose of the survey or work, statistical confidentiality and the penalties imposed in case of refusal of provision of data or of provision of false data, incomplete or inaccurate data.

Article 11.(3) Any person who refuses to provide data or who provides false, incomplete or inaccurate data is guilty of an offence and in case of conviction is liable to a fine not exceeding one thousand pounds or to imprisonment not exceeding six months or to both such fine and imprisonment.

"Agricultural holding or holding means a single unit, both technically and economically, which has a single management and which undertakes agricultural activities listed in Annex I of the Regulation 1166/2008 within economic territory of the European Union, either as its primary or secondary activity"

The activities undertaken by an agricultural holding are:

• Growing of non-perennial crops
• Growing of perennial crops (Agricultural holdings which produce wine or olive oil from self-produced grapes or olives are also included)
• Plant propagation
• Animal production (All activities classified under 01.49 of NACE Rev. 2 (Raising of other animals) are excluded, except the raising and breeding of ostriches, emus and rabbits and bee-keeping and production of honey and beeswax)
• Mixed farming
• Holdings exclusively maintaining agricultural land in good agricultural and environmental condition are also included 

Agricultural holdings were considered and surveyed only:

- if they have utilised agricultural area equal or greater than one decare (1 decare = 0,1 ha) (A_3_1$ha) or

- if they have at least half decare (0.05 ha) in greenhouse (sum(B_1_7_2$ha, B_1_8_2$ha, B_4_7$ha)), or  

- if they own animals, and specifically:

     -  one and more cows (sum(C_2_6$heads, C_2_99$heads)) or

     - a total of two and more other large animals of any kind and age (such as horses, camels) (sum(C_2_1$heads, C_2_2$heads,  C_2_3$heads, C_2_4$heads,  C_2_5$heads, C_1$heads)) or

     - a total of five and more small animals of any age and gender (such as goats, sheep, pigs) (sum(C_3_1$heads, C_3_2$heads, C_4$heads)) or

     - fifty and more poultry (C_5$heads), or

     - twenty and more beehives (C_7$hive), or

     - five and more ostriches (C_5_3_4$heads), or

     - ten and more rabbit breeding females (C_6$heads). 

The reference period for the benefit of the holding for rural development measures was years 2014, 2015 and 2016. 

(I) November – December 2015

(a) Preparation of basic and supplementary questionnaires 
(b) Preparation for the conduct of a pilot survey in order to test the questionnaire and other parameters of the survey.
(c) Recruitment, training and carrying out of the pilot survey among 200 agricultural holdings.
(d) The pilot survey was analyzed and discussed by the staff of the Agricultural Section of CYSTAT.

(II) January – March 2016

(a) Corrections and preparation of basic and supplementary questionnaires of FSS.
(b) Preparation of the instructions, handbook and all relevant documents to be used in the survey.
(c) Preparation of the data entry software program by editing all validation rules.

(III) March – July 2016

(a) Updating and editing of the farm register formed from the Agricultural Census 2010.
(b) Sample selection on the basis of the typology prepared by EUROSTAT.
(c) Preparation of the data entry process continues by repeated tests of a software program designed by members of the project team.
(d) Printing and distributing all questionnaires, documents and other stationery materials to district offices. 
(e) District Officers were briefed on all administrative matters relating to the conduct of the survey. They were shown and explained all the documents that should be used.

(IV) August - September 2016

(a) Recruitment of area supervisors and enumerators. One week´s training of the district officers, the area supervisors and the enumerators. Three days were devoted entirely to the questionnaire, to coverage aspects of the survey and to administrative procedures that should be followed during the survey and two days for completing a real questionnaire and discussing it with the area supervisors. The training was provided by the project team in two groups of employees, the first group comprising enumerators of the districts of Nicosia and Larnaca and the second group comprising enumerators of Lemesos and Paphos. The first group was trained by the team at the central offices of CYSTAT in Nicosia and the second in Lemesos.
(b) The preparation of the data entry process continues by repeated tests of a software program designed by members of the project team. At this stage all the necessary hardware equipment was also set up in a special room at the central offices of CYSTAT. 

(V) September 2016 – December 2016

(a) Data collection.
(b) Data checking. This was done through a multi-stage process.
(c) Coverage checking
(d) Data entry
All of the above stages of work were carried out concurrently.

(VI) January 2017 – February 2017

(a) Data collection and data entry process continues.

(VII) February - March 2017

(a) Final checks of the FSS data entry process.
(b) Merging of all data and preparing for the data analysis for FSS.

(VIII) March - April 2017

(a) Corrections and data analysis for EUROFARM purposes
(b) Commencement of data analysis for other purposes. Commencement of editing and updating of the farm register.

(IX) May 2017

(a) EUROFARM data sent to Eurostat

This ensured a more efficient implementation of the checking process (explained in detail in section 3.4 Data validation) since people were hierarchically in a better position to check, correct and direct the work of personnel under their responsibility.

In total 80 people worked in the FSS 2016. The status and responsibilities of these employees are shown below:

• project leader : 1 employee, the person responsible for Agricultural Statistics

• project team : 6 employees, permanent staff members of the Agricultural Statistics Section

• district officers : 4 permanent employees, members of the project team

• area supervisors : 10 casual employees

• data collection : 60 casual employees

• district checking units : 3 casual employees

• central checking unit : 2 permanent employees and 2 casual employees

• data entry : 6 casual employees

• data analysis for Eurofarm purposes : 3 permanent employees (1 project leader and also member of the project team, 1 permanent employee of the Data processing unit of CYSTAT, 1 permanent employee of CYSTAT with previous experience on Eurofarm)

• data analysis for other purposes : 1 project leader and also member of the project team

It is noted that the total number of employees above sums up to over 80 people due to the fact that the project team members and casual employees appear in more than one of the various categories of work responsibilities.

A list frame is used, based on the holding`s identification number.

1st group: SO is equal to 0

2nd group: SO is greater than 0 and smaller than 5000

3rd group: SO is greater than or equal to 5 000 and smaller than 15000

4th group: SO is greater than or equal to 15000

Then the holdings were divided according to their typology (two level farm type) and the resulting strata are presented in the table below:

In case of a census 1=3+4+5

Only for sample survey, in which case 2=3+4+5

This item is a subset of 3.

4>4.1+4.2

5=5.1+5.2

5.1>=5.1.1+5.1.2

6=5.2+5.1.2+4.2

Accurate and good quality data were set from the start as a primary objective of the survey. This goal could only be achieved if the collected data could efficiently and effectively be checked. For this purpose, a multilevel checking system of questionnaires was set up immediately after data collection commenced.

1. During the first week of data collection, area supervisors were instructed to collect and check all the questionnaires completed by every interviewer on a daily basis. This action was considered particularly important in the sense that any errors made would be identified at the earliest stage and brought to the attention of the interviewers so that the degree of repetition of such errors would be minimised considerably during the rest of data collection period.

The checks made by area supervisors were of twofold nature:

- First, they were obligated to check the information contained in each questionnaire for errors or inaccuracies. These checks included completeness, validations in relation to information available in the register and between related variables, acceptable ranges, summations, ratios and rational checks. 

- Second, they were instructed to make coverage checks. They were asked to come in contact with all of the respondents for whom a questionnaire was completed (either through telephone or personal visit) and to ensure that the questionnaire was filled out according to instructions, that is, during the personal visit of the interviewer to the respondent and that all questions were asked. This checking method was implemented from the very first week of data collection and this proved useful because enumerators knew that all their work was thoroughly checked and that there was no room for shallow approaches.

From the second week onwards, area supervisors were obligated to collect the completed questionnaires from every interviewer and were instructed to carry out numerical completeness and validation checks to all questionnaires, whereas they were instructed to carry out analytical, weekly coverage checks on a sample of at least 10% of the collected questionnaires. They should also ensure that this sample contained at least one questionnaire for each interviewer so that the work of everyone was checked on a weekly basis. Taking into account that every area supervisor was responsible for about 7 interviewers, each of whom completed 20 questionnaires per week, this checking process implied that area supervisors had to check analytically at least 20 questionnaires per week. In cases where mistakes were found repeatedly on the questionnaires of any specific enumerator, the checking unit was asked to raise the percentage of questionnaires checked with respect to the work of that enumerator. Similarly, the percentage of questionnaires checked was raised in the case that mistakes were frequently found in the questionnaires of any particular area supervisor.

2. District officers were requested to set up checking units comprising one or two casual employees working under their guidance and supervision. These units had the obligation to come in contact with those people who reported not having an agricultural holding in order to ensure that the interviewer had actually visited these people and the declaration of not having an agricultural holding is correct. It is noted that interviewers were instructed to report those cases where they visited people who reported that they were not holders of any agricultural holding, providing the name and address of these people.

3. The central office of CYSTAT gave clear instructions to permanent employees to check at least 5% of the questionnaires submitted by each area supervisor. They were also instructed to ensure that the sample of questionnaires chosen for checking purposes should include at least some cases of those questionnaires that were analytically checked at an earlier stage. This process ensured that not only the work of interviewers was being checked but also the work of area supervisors. This level of checking was also done on a weekly basis in order to identify errors and weaknesses as early as possible and to take immediate action for correction purposes and for avoiding repetition and accumulation of mistakes.

4. Finally, checks were carried out during data entry by the software program itself. The program carried out several checks such as consistency checks, valid value and range checks, arithmetic checks etc.

Checks on the accuracy of the data and on coverage were concurrently done.

Tools used for data validation

The software program used during data entry (see point 4 above)

Level of data validation

The first step of this checking process was in the hands of area supervisors (see point 1 above).

The second step of the checking process was carried out by district officers (see point 2 above).

A third level of checking was carried out at the central office of CYSTAT (see point 3 above).

W_hi = N_hi / n_hi

where:

• N_hi is the total number of holdings in stratum i and
• n_hi is the number of holdings in the sample selected from stratum i

The weight of each holding is proportional to the sample size of the stratum in which the holding belongs.

Some characteristics were added to the questionnaire which are not mentioned in EC 1166/2008 but are necessary for national purposes. These were the following:

1) first name and surname, personal identification code and contact details of the holders;
2) detailed data on agricultural crops were recorded with respect to the different municipalities where the actual area was located;
3) areas were recorded on lentils, chick peas, cowpeas, haricot beans, louvana, beetroot, dasheen (kolocasi), groundnuts, sesame, different kinds or fruit trees, nuts and citrus fruits, carob trees;
4) number of livestock on horses and donkeys.

 Se = √Σ^H_i=1 N_hi (W_hi - 1) S²_i

where:

• N_hi is the total number of holdings in stratum i
• W_hi is the weight of each holding in stratum i and
• S²_i is the variance within stratum i

Errors were checked by checking the data against the prior information available in the existing register and in many cases by contacting the holder again through the telephone. The need for such corrections was minimal. Follow-up interviews were carried out during the data collection process in those cases where the checking process suggested that these should be done. These checks were based on relevant information about each holding which was already available from previous surveys of the Statistical Services. After the completion of data collection, however, neither follow-up interviews took place nor imputations were made.

The analytical checking process in conjunction with the intensive call-back strategy minimised almost entirely missing and inaccurate data as well as the number of lost cases. This led to the elimination of any measurement errors and therefore no correction of statistics was necessary.

Holder was too busy to give information = 54 cases

Holder refused to give any information = 184 cases

Holder was unable to give information because of illness = 66 cases

Holder was abroad during the survey period = 40 cases

The area covered by the above holdings represents 2% of the total UAA and the rate of non-response is also 2%, which is considered insignificant and the impact is minimal. Therefore there was no need to recalculate the weights due to the above non-response.

By the end of the survey and the finalisation of the data, all errors were eliminated. 

CYSTAT also publishes a list of scheduled revisions (regular or major revisions), also published on its website, at the following link: http://www.mof.gov.cy/mof/cystat/statistics.nsf/releasecalendar_en/releasecalendar_en?OpenDocument

The Annual Working Unit is calculated using 8 hours per day, 260 days a year as a full-time equivalent number.

The reference period (mentioned in concept 2.8 Time coverage) remained the same as in FSS 2013. 

Under the provisions of the Statistics Law, CYSTAT may release microdata for the sole use of scientific research. Applicants have to submit the request form "APPLICATION FOR DATA FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES" giving thorough information on the project for which micro-data are needed.

The application is evaluated by CYSTAT’s Confidentiality Committee and if the application is approved, a charge is fixed according to the volume and time consumed for preparation of the data. Micro-data may then be released after an anonymisation process which ensures no direct identification of the statistical units but, at the same time, ensures usability of the data. The link for the application is attached below.

• National Statistics Law No. 15(I) of 2000 (especially Article 13 on statistical confidentiality).
• Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and its later amendments (especially Chapter 5 on statistical confidentiality).
• European Statistics Code of Practice (especially Principle 5 on statistical confidentiality).
• CYSTAT's Code of Practice for the Collection, Publication and Storage of Statistical Data.

Eurofarm data are send through Edamis encrypted and the summary tables will show total values for all Cyprus and will not include row data in order to ensure confidentiality.