Orchard (orch)

National Reference Metadata in ESS Standard for Orchard survey Quality Report Structure (esqrsor)

Compiling agency: French ministry of agriculture and food  (Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l'Alimentation): http://agriculture.gouv.fr/ Statistical and Foresight Department (Service de la Statistique et de la Prospective): http://agreste.agriculture.gouv.fr/


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

French ministry of agriculture and food  (Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l'Alimentation):

http://agriculture.gouv.fr/

Statistical and Foresight Department (Service de la Statistique et de la Prospective):

http://agreste.agriculture.gouv.fr/
1.2. Contact organisation unit

Department of agricultural, forest and agrifood statistics (Sous-direction des statistiques agricoles, forestières et agroalimentaires: SDSAFA)

Unit of structural, environmental and forestry statistics (Bureau des Statistiques Structurelles, Environnementales et Forestières: BSSEF)

Service de la statistique et de la prospective
1.5. Contact mail address

MAA- SG

SSP-BSSEF
Complexe agricole d'Auzeville
BP 32688
31326 CASTANET TOLOSAN


2. Statistical presentation Top
2.1. Data description

Main characteristics

2.1.1 Describe shortly the main characteristics of the statistics  

Structural orchard statistics provide data on the area, age and density of apple, pear, peach, nectarine, apricot, citrus fruit and olive orchards and vineyards producing table grapes. The statistics are collected from surveys and administrative data sources. Data are collected on national level and for some variables also at NUTS1 level. The data collection concerns countries with more than 1000 ha of area for any single fruit tree type.
2.1.2 Which of the fruit tree types are covered by the data collection?  Dessert apple trees
Dessert pear trees
Apricot trees
Dessert peach and nectarine trees
Peach and nectarine trees for industrial processing (including group of Pavie)
Small citrus fruit trees
Olive trees
2.1.3 If Other, please specify

For national needs :

- walnut

- plum

- cherry

- kiwi

- other


Reference period

2.1.4 Reference period of the data collection 

2016
2.1.5 When was the data collection done (month(s) and year)

october 2016 - february 2017


National legislation

2.1.6 Is there a national legislation covering these statistics?  No
If Yes, please answer all the following questions.   
2.1.7 Name of the national legislation 

 
2.1.8 Link to the national legislation 
2.1.9 Responsible organisation for the national legislation 

 
2.1.10 Year of entry into force of the national legislation 
2.1.11 Please indicate which variables required under EU regulation are not covered by national legislation, if any.
2.1.12 Please indicate which national definitions differ from those in the EU regulation, if any. 
2.1.13 Please indicate which additional variables have been collected if compared to Regulation (EU) 1337/2011, if any?
2.1.14 Is there a legal obligation for respondents to reply?  Yes


Additional comments on data description

Data collection : within Farm Structure Survey 2016 for the first time
2.2. Classification system

Species and variety group classification, age and density classifications available in RAMON
2.3. Coverage - sector

Growing of perennial crops (NACE A01.2)
2.4. Statistical concepts and definitions

See: Orchard statistics Handbook

2.4.1 Do national crop item definitions differ from the definitions in the Handbook  (D-flagged data)? Yes
2.4.2 If Yes, please specify the items and the differences

Small citrus fruit trees in France 2017 = only mandarin, clementin
2.4.3 If the fruits for industrial processing are not separately surveyed, are they included in dessert fruit categories? No
2.4.4 If yes, for which fruit tree types?
In case data are delivered for one of the items below, describe the 10 biggest varieties included in the item:   
2.4.5 Other dessert apples n.e.c.
2.4.6 Other dessert pears n.e.c.
2.4.7 Other oranges n.e.c.
2.4.8 Other small citrus fruits, including hybrids
2.5. Statistical unit

Utilised agricultural area used for the cultivation of permanent crops mentioned in point 2.1, cultivated by an agricultural holding producing entirely or mainly for the market.

 
2.6. Statistical population

All agricultural holdings growing entirely or mainly for the market permanent crops mentioned in point 2.1.

French national thresholds :

Farms with at least

- 1 hectare (>=) for apple treas OR peach and nectarine trees OR apricot trees OR small citrus fruit (mandarin / clementin) OR olive trees

- or 0.5 hectare of pear trees
2.7. Reference area
2.7.1 Geographical area covered

Entire France

Overseas departments are only surveyed for small citrus fruit trees
2.7.2 Which special Member State territories are included?
2.8. Coverage - Time

Reference period

National orchard surveys have existed since 1969 (1969/1974/1977/1982/1987/1992/1997/2002/2007/2012/2016)
2.9. Base period


3. Statistical processing Top
3.1. Source data

Overall summary

3.1.1 Total number of different data sources used

2
The breakdown is as follows: 
3.1.2 Total number of sources of the type "Census"

1
3.1.3 Total number of sources of the type "Sample survey"

1
3.1.4 Total number of sources of the type "Administrative source"

0
3.1.5 Total number of sources of the type "Experts"

0
3.1.6 Total number of sources of the type "Other sources"

0


Census

These questions only apply to censuses. If there is more than one census, please describe the main census below and the additional ones in table 3.1 of the annexed Excel file 
3.1.7 Name/Title

2012 orchard census results
3.1.8 Name of Organisation responsible

Statistical and Foresight Department of French ministry of agriculture and food
3.1.9 Main scope

Orchard survey
3.1.10 Target fruit tree types Dessert apple trees
Dessert pear trees
Apricot trees
Dessert peach and nectarine trees
Small citrus fruit trees
Table grape vines
Other
3.1.11 List used to build the frame

2010 agricultural census
3.1.12 Any possible threshold values

1 hectare (except for cherry, for table grape and for pear : 0,5 hectare)
3.1.13 Population size

14 000 units
3.1.14 Additional comments

2012 orchard results were used to improve data collected in 2016 as we had problems on our sample, see 3.5.1


Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 3.1 of the annexed Excel file 
3.1.15 Name/Title

Farm Structure Survey 2016 - orchard module
3.1.16 Name of Organisation responsible

French ministry of agriculture and food  (Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l'Alimentation)

Statistical and Foresight Department (Service de la Statistique et de la Prospective)

Department of agricultural, forest and agrifood statistics (Sous-direction des statistiques agricoles, forestières et agroalimentaires: SDSAFA)

Unit of structural, environmental and forestry statistics (Bureau des Statistiques Structurelles, Environnementales et Forestières: BSSEF)
3.1.17 Main scope

Farm structure surveys
3.1.18 Target fruit tree types Dessert apple trees
Dessert pear trees
Apricot trees
Dessert peach and nectarine trees
Peach and nectarine trees for industrial processing (including group of Pavie)
Small citrus fruit trees
Olive trees
Other
3.1.19 List used to build the frame

Our database for agricultural statistics, our agricultural register, called BALSA for : Base de Sondage pour la Statistique Agricole

constructed with :

  • 2010 agricultural census results
  • administrative data sources to update census results, of which French business register
  • surveys/census results of which orchard 2012
3.1.20 Any possible threshold values

See 2.6
3.1.21 Population size

The scope of 2016 Farm Structure Survey is a total of 546 285.
3.1.22 Sample size

FSS sample size : 71 341
3.1.23 Sampling basis List
3.1.24 If Other, please specify
3.1.25 Type of sample design Stratified
3.1.26 If Other, please specify
3.1.27 If Stratified, number of strata

There were initially 3 925 strata in FSS 2016 sample.

 14 strata in final orchard sample
3.1.28 If Stratified, stratification criteria Unit size
Unit location
Unit specialization
Other
3.1.29 If Other, please specify

 A large full coverage stata

 

 
3.1.30 Additional comments

In 2016, for the first time, we included orchard data collection within our Farm Structure Survey.
As problems were detected in our sample, see 3.5.1, we made corrections on extrapolation factors and we used 2012 orchard census results to improve our data.


Administrative source

These questions only apply to administrative sources. If there is more than one administrative source, please describe the main source below and the additional ones in table 3.1 of the annexed Excel file 
3.1.31 Name/Title
3.1.32 Name of Organisation responsible
3.1.33 Contact information (email and phone)
3.1.34 Main administrative scope
3.1.35 Target fruit tree types 
3.1.36 Geospatial Coverage
3.1.37 Update frequency
3.1.38 Legal basis
3.1.39 Are you able to access directly to the micro data?
3.1.40 Are you able to check the plausibility of the data, namely by contacting directly the units?
3.1.41 How would you assess the proximity of the definitions and concepts (including statistical units) used in the administrative source with those required in the EU regulation?
3.1.42 Please list the main differences between the administrative source and the statistical definitions and concepts
3.1.43 Is a different threshold used in the administrative source and statistical data?
3.1.44 If Yes, please specify
3.1.45 Additional comments


Experts

If there is more than one Expert source, please describe the main one below and the additional ones in table 3.1 of the annexed Excel file 
3.1.46 Name/Title
3.1.47 Primary purpose
3.1.48 Target fruit tree types
3.1.49 Legal basis
3.1.50 Update frequency
3.1.51 Expert data supplier
3.1.52 If Other, please specify
3.1.53 How would you assess the quality of those data?
3.1.54 Additional comments


Other sources

If there is more than one other statistical activity, please describe the main one below and the additional ones in table 3.1 of the annexed Excel file 
3.1.55 Name/Title
3.1.56 Name of Organisation
3.1.57 Primary purpose
3.1.58 Target fruit tree types 
3.1.59 Data type
3.1.60 If Other, please specify
3.1.61 How would you assess the quality of those data?
3.1.62 Additional comments
3.2. Frequency of data collection

Every 5 years
3.3. Data collection

Census

These questions only apply to censuses. If there is more than one census, please describe the main census below and the additional ones in table 3.3 of the annexed Excel file 
3.3.1 Name/Title

2012 orchard census results
3.3.2 Methods of data collection Face-to-face interview
3.3.3 If Other, please specify
3.3.4 If face-to-face or telephone interview, which method is used? Electronic questionnaire
3.3.5 Data entry method, if paper questionnaires?
3.3.6 Please annex the questionnaire used (if very long: please provide the hyperlink)

http://agreste.agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/questionnaires227bsva.pdf
3.3.7 Additional comments


Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 3.3 of the annexed Excel file 
3.3.8 Name/Title

Farm Structure Survey 2016 - orchard module
3.3.9 Methods of data collection Face-to-face interview
3.3.10 If Other, please specify
3.3.11 If face-to-face or telephone interview, which method is used? Electronic questionnaire
3.3.12 Data entry method, if paper questionnaires?
3.3.13 Please annex the questionnaire used (if very long: please provide the hyperlink)
3.3.14 Additional comments

For the first time, we added orchard questions in our Farm Structure Surveys

Data pre filled with ORCHARD data 2012


Administrative source

These questions only apply to administrative sources. If there is more than one administrative source, please describe the main source below and the additional ones in table 3.3 of the annexed Excel file 
3.3.15 Name/Title
3.3.16 Extraction date
3.3.17 How easy is it to get access to the data?
3.3.18 Data transfer method
3.3.19 Additional comments


Experts

If there is more than one other statistical activity, please describe the main one below and the additional ones in table 3.3 of the annexed Excel file 
3.3.20 Name/Title
3.3.21 Methods of data collection
3.3.22 Additional comments


Annexes:
QUESTIONNAIRE FSS2016 with orchard module
3.4. Data validation
3.4.1 Which kind of data validation measures are in place? Manual
Automatic
3.4.2 What do they target? Completeness
Consistency
3.4.3 If Other, please specify
3.5. Data compilation
3.5.1 Describe the data compilation process

Initial weights were FSS 2016 initial weights : total of units in the stratum / number of units in the sample for this stratum.

Treatments were made after data collection in order to correct these weighs.

Samples issues in 2016 :
In order to avoid disturbing farmers for several agricultural surveys, we have excluded of our frame 18 000 units which were in the sample of our national survey of agricultural practices for fruit production (surveyed in 2015).


However, as the sample for agricultural practices for fruit production was quite big, with a large full coverage strata, this cauded an undercoverage of fruit farms in our sample. 62 % of excluded units were big farms (Standard Output >= 100 000 euros). And at the same time, we had an overcoverage for fruits whitch were not surveyed in our FSS sample.


Corrections made :

-  Farms surveyed for orchards in FSS 2016 (4 374 farms) : Re stratification and new weihgt calculation after dataccollection ; based on a 2013 orchard census results minus farms not represented in 2016.
-  A new full coverage stratum : farms not represented in 2016 (4 162 farms) : in a full coverage strata with 2012 orchard census results ; area updated with our national survey of agricultural practices for fruit production (surveyed in 2015).

Non response : weight adjustment within each stratum.

 
3.5.2 Additional comments
3.6. Adjustment

See 3.5


4. Quality management Top
4.1. Quality assurance
4.1.1 Is there a quality management system used in the organisation? No
4.1.2 If yes, how is it implemented?
4.1.3 Has a peer review been carried out? No
4.1.4 If Yes, which were the main conclusions?
4.1.5 What quality improvements are foreseen? Other
4.1.6 If Other, please specify

Improvements in order to avoid under coverage or over coverage of some fruits
4.1.7 Additional comments
4.2. Quality management - assessment

Development since the last quality report

4.2.1 Overall quality Deterioration
4.2.2 Relevance Deterioration
4.2.3 Accuracy and reliability Deterioration
4.2.4 Timeliness and punctuality Stable
4.2.5 Comparability Stable
4.2.6 Coherence Stable
4.2.7 Additional comments


5. Relevance Top
5.1. Relevance - User Needs
5.1.1 If certain user needs are not met, please specify which and why

No national data dissemination
5.1.2 Please specify any plans to satisfy needs more completely in the future

 
5.1.3 Additional comments
5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction
5.2.1 Has a user satisfaction survey been conducted? No
If Yes, please answer all the following questions 
5.2.2 Year of the user satisfaction survey
5.2.3 How satisfied were the users?
5.2.4 Additional comments
5.3. Completeness
5.3.1 Data completeness - rate

71%
5.3.2 If not complete, which characteristics are missing?
5.3.3 Additional comments

All information required has been given, except detailed on varieties for Small Citrus Fruits and Clementines. Furthermore, no data for Table Grapes - Lemons - Oranges.


6. Accuracy and reliability Top
6.1. Accuracy - overall
6.1.1 How good is the accuracy? Poor
6.1.2 What are the main factors lowering the accuracy? Coverage error
6.1.3 If Other, please specify
6.1.4 Additional comments
6.2. Sampling error

Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 6.2 of the annexed Excel file 
6.2.1 Name/Title

Coverage errors because of negative coordination with our 2015 national fruit survey for agricultural practices : SEE 6.3 / coverage errors.
6.2.2 Methods used to assess the sampling error Comparisons with other sources
6.2.3 If Other, please specify
6.2.4 Methods used to derive the extrapolation factor Other
6.2.5 If Other, please specify

See 3.5
6.2.6 If coefficients of variation are calculated, please describe the calculation methods and formulas

 

 Calculation : CV = Precision / 100

Precision : formula for sample with stratification and equal probabilities
6.2.7 Sampling error - indicators

Please provide the coefficients of variation in %

  CV (%)
Dessert apple trees  0.09
Apple trees for industrial processing  _
Dessert pear trees  0.46
Pear trees for industrial processing _
Apricot trees

 0.35
Dessert peach and nectarine trees  0.38
Peach and nectarine trees for industrial processing (including group of Pavie)  2.9
Orange trees  _
   
Lemon trees  _
Olive trees  1.64
Table grape vines  _
6.2.8 Additional comments
6.3. Non-sampling error

See sections below.
6.3.1. Coverage error

Census

These questions only apply to censuses. If there is more than one census, please describe the main census below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.1.1 Name/Title

2012 orchard census results
Over-coverage
6.3.1.2 Does the sample frame include wrongly classified units that are out of scope? No
6.3.1.3 What methods are used to detect the out-of scope units?

Validation of the data was made in 2013
6.3.1.4 Does the sample frame include units that do not exist in practice? No
6.3.1.5 Over-coverage - rate

0% 

 
6.3.1.6 Impact on the data quality None
Under-coverage
6.3.1.7 Does the sample frame include all units falling within the scope of this survey? No
6.3.1.8 If Not, which units are not included?
6.3.1.9 How large do you estimate the proportion of those units? (%)

0%
6.3.1.10 Impact on the data quality None
Misclassification
6.3.1.11 Impact on the data quality None
Common units
6.3.1.12 Common units - proportion
6.3.1.13 Additional comments

 We used for 2016 census "cleaned" data from 2012 orchard census.


Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.1.14 Name/Title

Farm Structure Survey 2016 - orchard module
Over-coverage
6.3.1.15 Does the sample frame include wrongly classified units that are out of scope? Yes
6.3.1.16 What methods are used to detect the out-of scope units?

Out of scope units : detected with FSS detailed questions on UAA.

--> detections of units under thresholds.
6.3.1.17 Does the sample frame include units that do not exist in practice? Yes
6.3.1.18 Over-coverage - rate

Overcoverage of fruits that were not concerned by our 2015 national fruit survey for agricultural practices, especially walnut trees :

34 % of walnut trees in total fruit area in our first 2016 results

0%

VS 18 % of walnut trees n total fruit area with our 2013 national fruit census

 
6.3.1.19 Impact on the data quality High
Under-coverage 
6.3.1.20 Does the sample frame include all units falling within the scope of this survey? No
6.3.1.21 If Not, which units are not included?

Under coverage of some fruits that were in our 2015 national fruit survey for agricultural practices, as we avoid to survey twice the same farm, especially for apple trees

6.3.1.22 How large do you estimate the proportion of those units? (%)

Under coverage of some fruits that were in our 2015 national fruit survey for agricultural practices, as we avoid to survey twice the same farm, especially for apple trees :

23 % of apple trees in total fruit area in our first 2016 results, with initial extrapolation factors (before adjustments)

vs 32 % of apple trees in total fruit area, 2013 fruit census result
6.3.1.23 Impact on the data quality High
Misclassification
6.3.1.24 Impact on the data quality
Common units 
6.3.1.25 Common units - proportion

No one.
6.3.1.26 Additional comments


Administrative data

These questions only apply to administrative sources. If there is more than one administrative source, please describe the main source below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.1.27 Name/Title of the administrative source
Over-coverage
6.3.1.28 Does the administrative source include wrongly classified units that are out of scope?
6.3.1.29 What methods are used to detect the out-of scope units?
6.3.1.30 Does the administrative source include units that do not exist in practice?
6.3.1.31 Over-coverage - rate
6.3.1.32 Impact on the data quality
Under-coverage
6.3.1.33 Does the administrative source include all units falling within the scope of this survey?
6.3.1.34 If Not, which units are not included?
6.3.1.35 How large do you estimate the proportion of those units? (%)
6.3.1.36 Impact on the data quality
Misclassification 
6.3.1.37 Impact on the data quality
6.3.1.38 Additional comments
6.3.2. Measurement error

Census

These questions only apply to censuses. If there is more than one census, please describe the main census below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.2.1 Name/Title

2012 orchard census results
6.3.2.2 Is the questionnaire based on usual concepts for respondents? Yes
6.3.2.3 Number of censuses already performed with the current questionnaire?

none
6.3.2.4 Preparatory testing of the questionnaire? Yes
6.3.2.5 Number of units participating in the tests? 

not available
6.3.2.6 Explanatory notes/handbook for surveyors/respondents?  Yes
6.3.2.7 On-line FAQ or Hot-line support for surveyors/respondents? Yes
6.3.2.8 Are there pre-filled questions? No
6.3.2.9 Percentage of pre-filled questions out of total number of questions

0 
6.3.2.10 Other actions taken for reducing the measurement error?

 
6.3.2.11 Additional comments

 We used for 2016 census "cleaned" data from 2012 orchard census.


Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.2.12 Name/Title

Farm Structure Survey 2016 - orchard module
6.3.2.13 Is the questionnaire based on usual concepts for respondents? Yes
6.3.2.14 Number of surveys already performed with the current questionnaire?
6.3.2.15 Preparatory testing of the questionnaire? Yes
6.3.2.16 Number of units participating in the tests? 

71 units tested for whole FSS 2016
6.3.2.17 Explanatory notes/handbook for surveyors/respondents?  Yes
6.3.2.18 On-line FAQ or Hot-line support for surveyors/respondents? Yes
6.3.2.19 Are there pre-filled questions? Yes
6.3.2.20 Percentage of pre-filled questions out of total number of questions

 Preffiled data with orchard 2012 census results for all units in the sample that were found in 2012 orchard census.

6.3.2.21 Other actions taken for reducing the measurement error?

validation rules within our electronic questionnaire
6.3.2.22 Additional comments
6.3.3. Non response error

Census

These questions only apply to censuses. If there is more than one census, please describe the main census below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.3.1 Name/Title of the survey

2012 orchard census results
6.3.3.2 Unit non-response - rate

0% 
6.3.3.3 How do you evaluate the recorded unit non-response rate in the overall context?
6.3.3.4 Measures taken for minimising the unit non-response
6.3.3.5 If Other, please specify
6.3.3.6 Item non-response rate

 
6.3.3.7 Item non-response rate - Minimum

 
6.3.3.8 Item non-response rate - Maximum

 
6.3.3.9 Which items had a high item non-response rate? 

 
6.3.3.10 Additional comments

We used for 2016 census "cleaned" data from 2012 orchard census.


Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.3.11 Name/Title of the survey

Farm Structure Survey 2016 - orchard module
6.3.3.12 Unit non-response - rate

 Non response rate for FSS 2016 : 6 %

Non response rate for orchard module within FSS 2016 respondants :  1.8 %

6.3.3.13 How do you evaluate the recorded unit non-response rate in the overall context? Very low
6.3.3.14 Measures taken for minimising the unit non-response Weighting
6.3.3.15 If Other, please specify
6.3.3.16 Item non-response rate

None

Manual corrections
6.3.3.17 Item non-response rate - Minimum

 
6.3.3.18 Item non-response rate - Maximum

 
6.3.3.19 Which items had a high item non-response rate? 

 
6.3.3.20 Additional comments
6.3.4. Processing error

Census

These questions only apply to censuses. If there is more than one census, please describe the main census below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.4.1 Name/Title

2012 orchard census results
6.3.4.2 Imputation - rate
6.3.4.3 Imputation - basis
6.3.4.4 If Other, please specify
6.3.4.5 Additional comments

We used for 2016 census "cleaned" data from 2012 orchard census.


Sample survey

These questions only apply to surveys. If there is more than one survey, please describe the main survey below and the additional ones in table 6.3 of the annexed Excel file 
6.3.4.6 Name/Title

Farm Structure Survey 2016 - orchard module
6.3.4.7 Imputation - rate

26%
6.3.4.8 Imputation - basis Other
6.3.4.9 If Other, please specify

2012 orchard results, with area uptaded with 2015 national agricultural pratices survey for fruit production)
6.3.4.10 How do you evaluate the impact of imputation on Coefficients of Variation? Important
6.3.4.11 Additionnal comments

In our final 2016 national database used to transmit data to Eurostat, because of issues explained in 6.3.1  and corrections explained in 3.5.1 ; 26 % of the units are imputed with 2012 orchard census results.

See 3.5.1 and 6.3.1
6.3.5. Model assumption error
6.4. Seasonal adjustment

None
6.5. Data revision - policy

No national data dissemination in december 2018
6.6. Data revision - practice
6.6.1 Data revision - average size

No revision made
6.6.2 Were data revisions due to conceptual changes (e.g. new definitions)  carried out since the last quality report?
6.6.3 What was the main reason for the revisions?

 
6.6.4 How do you evaluate the impact of the revisions?
6.6.5 Additional comments


7. Timeliness and punctuality Top
7.1. Timeliness
7.1.1 When were  the first  results for the reference period published?

 November 2018 (data transmission to Eurostat)
7.1.2 When were  the final results for the reference period published?

No national publication in december 2018
7.1.3 Reasons for possible long production times?

Sample issues, with over coverage and undercoverage that required treatments for re calculation of extrapolation coefficients.
7.2. Punctuality
7.2.1 Were data released nationally according to a pre-announced schedule (Release Calendar)? No
7.2.2 If Yes, were data released on the target date?
7.2.3 If No, reasons for delays?

Data treatments

Quality issues
7.2.4 Number of days between the national release date of data and the target date

There won't be any national publication of our results.


8. Coherence and comparability Top
8.1. Comparability - geographical

To be assessed by Eurostat
8.1.1. Asymmetry for mirror flow statistics - coefficient
8.2. Comparability - over time
8.2.1 Length of comparable time series

2012 : orchard census with specific fruits surveyed and thersholds

2016 : orchard sample with specific fruits surveyed and thersholds
8.2.2 Have there been major breaks in the time series? Yes
8.2.3 If Yes, please specify the year of break and the reason

2016 = sample within FSS

2012 = census

Changes in fruits surveyed
8.2.4 Additional comments
8.3. Coherence - cross domain
8.3.1 With which other national data sources have the data been compared? Annual crop statistics 2017
FSS 2016
IACS
8.3.2 If Other, please specify
8.3.3 Describe briefly the results of comparisons

Results should be expressed as percentage deviation from the corresponding areas in the orchard survey.

  Annual Crop Statistics (2017) FSS (2016) IACS Other source
Dessert apple trees  3 %  45%  n.a  _
Apple trees for industrial processing  _  _  _  _
Dessert pear trees  0%  47%   n.a  _
Pear trees for industrial processing  _  _  _  _
Apricot trees  12%  51%  n.a  _
Dessert peach and nectarine trees  17%  53%  n.a  _
Peach and nectarine trees for industrial processing (including group of Pavie)  _  _  _  _
Orange trees  _  _  _  _
Small citrus fruit trees  - 10 %  -23 %  n.a  _
Lemon trees  _  _  _ _
Olive trees  -12 %  - 2%  35 %  _
Table grape vines  _  _  _  _
8.3.4 If no comparisons have been made, explain why
8.3.5 Additional comments
8.4. Coherence - sub annual and annual statistics

See 8.3 for comparisons with annual crop statistics
8.5. Coherence - National Accounts

No comparisons made
8.6. Coherence - internal


9. Accessibility and clarity Top
9.1. Dissemination format - News release
9.1.1 Do you publish a news release? No
9.1.2 If Yes, please provide a link
9.2. Dissemination format - Publications
9.2.1 Do you produce a paper publication? No
9.2.2 If Yes, is there an English version?
9.2.3 Do you produce an electronic publication? No
9.2.4 If Yes, is there an English version?
9.2.5 Please provide a link
9.3. Dissemination format - online database
9.3.1 Data tables - consultations

No public table available
9.3.2 Is an on-line database accessible to users? No
9.3.3 Please provide a link
9.4. Dissemination format - microdata access
9.4.1 Are micro-data accessible to users? No
9.4.2 Please provide a link
9.5. Dissemination format - other
9.6. Documentation on methodology
9.6.1 Are national reference metadata files available? No
9.6.2 Please provide a link
9.6.3 Are methodological papers available? No
9.6.4 Please provide a link
9.6.5 Is a handbook available? Yes
9.6.6 Please provide a link

Handbook for national surveyers, not published.
9.7. Quality management - documentation
9.7.1 Metadata completeness - rate

0%
9.7.2 Metadata - consultations

none
9.7.3 Is a quality report available? No
9.7.4 Please provide a link


10. Cost and Burden Top
10.1 Efficiency gains if compared to the previous quality report Other
10.2 If Other, please specify

Orchard 2012 = census

Orchard 2017 = included in FSS 2016 sample
10.3 Burden reduction measures since the previous quality report Less respondents
Other
10.4 If Other, please specify

Prefilled data with orchard 2012 census in order to reduce burden for respondants if no change since 2012


11. Confidentiality Top
11.1. Confidentiality - policy
11.1.1 Are confidential data transmitted to Eurostat? No
11.1.2 If yes, are they confidential in the sense of Reg. (EC) 223/2009?
11.1.3 Describe the data confidentiality policy in place
11.2. Confidentiality - data treatment
11.2.1 Describe the procedures for ensuring confidentiality during dissemination

Because of sample issues, no national data dissemination of orchard survey 2016 in France.

11.2.2 Additional comments

 


12. Comment Top


Related metadata Top


Annexes Top
ESQRS_ANNEX_FR