PILOT STUDIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF LINKING IACS AND

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "PILOT STUDIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF LINKING IACS AND"

Transcription

1 PILOT STUDIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF LINKING IACS AND OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE REGISTER AND STATISTICS Grant Agreement No FINAL METHODOLOGICAL REPORT December 2015, Vilnius Project Manager Aušra Jablonskienė Head, Agricultural and Environmental Statistics Division Statistics Lithuania Page 1 of 25

2 Content 1. Introduction Pilot project implementation Project objectives Project implementation 3 3. Analysis of the Animal Register data and possibility to use them for the annual statistical livestock survey purposes Description of the annual statistical livestock survey in Lithuania Analysis of the data from the Animal Register Results of the analysis of the data from the Animal Register Decision on statistical livestock survey Results of the testing of the methodology developed Ensuring continuity of the project results Analysis of the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data and possibility to use them for the Farm Structure Surveys (FSS) Description of the Farm Structure Surveys (FSS) in Lithuania Information about the Agriculture and Rural Business Register Analysis and comparison of FSS 2013 and the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data Decision on using the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data in the FSS Conclusions Recommendations to other countries.24 Page 2 of 25

3 1. Introduction The burden on both NSI s and respondents is a continuous problem in agricultural statistics. New needs emerge, while the old ones rarely disappear. The Common Agricultural Policy requires farmers in all Member States who apply for subsidies to provide certain information that is stored in administrative registers. Often the same, or very similar, information is collected in agricultural statistics surveys. This potential overlap of data collection should, where possible, be eliminated, thus reducing the administrative and statistical response burden for the farmers. Statistics Lithuania uses Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) data for producing agricultural statistics; however, at present, these data are used mostly for data checking. Only the Organic Farming Register s micro data are used directly in farm structure surveys, and aggregated data from the Crop Declaration Database are used in annual crop statistics. The first attempt to use IACS data (the Crop Declaration Database and the Animal Register) was made during the Farm Structure Survey 2013 (FSS 2013). FSS 2013 questionnaires were prefilled with the available data from the Crop Declaration Database and the Animal Register. Some land and livestock characteristics were prefilled. Thus, Statistics Lithuania using experience gained during the Farm Structure Survey 2013 has decided to develop the methodology how to use the Animal Register data for conducting the annual livestock surveys as much as possible. Moreover, it was decided to analyse the possibility to use the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data for Farm Structure Surveys. 2. Pilot project implementation 2.1. Project objectives The main objective of this project is to achieve that agricultural statistics in Lithuania would be developed so that data that are already available would not be collected again, thus reducing the burden on both respondents and statistical offices. To achieve this objective, it is necessary to determine the areas of agricultural statistics in which double data collection exists and to elaborate a methodology how to adapt statistical survey methodologies and to use administrative data sources as much as possible to avoid this double data collection. The expected results of this project are the development and testing of new methodological approaches towards data collection that would reduce the response burden by improving the synergy between statistical surveys and administrative data collection Project implementation First of all, the list of the staff members a Working Group involved in the project was drawn up and approved by the order of the Director General (Order No 35 of 28 January 2014). The Working Group for the project consists of the specialists of the Agricultural and Environmental Statistics Division and IT specialists of Statistics Lithuania. The action plan for each member of the said Working Group was created. The FSS 2013 experience in Lithuania and the latest experience of the EU member states, as well as other methodological material were analysed. Due to large workload with FSS 2013 data in 2014 (the year 2014 in Lithuania was dedicated to the checking, analysis and transmission of FSS 2013 data to Eurostat), only the Animal Register data and the possibility to use these data for the preparation of livestock statistics was analysed at the Page 3 of 25

4 first stage of this project. The greatest attention was paid to an annual livestock statistical survey that Statistics Lithuania carries out each January (reference date 31 December). Such order of workload was foreseen in the grant agreement and fully satisfies the conditions of the signed grant agreement. In 2015, analysis of the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data was conducted. Moreover, the creation and testing of the methodology how to use the Animal Register data for annual livestock surveys was continued. 3. Analysis of the Animal Register data and possibility to use them for the annual statistical livestock survey purposes 3.1. Description of the annual statistical livestock survey in Lithuania Statistics Lithuania is responsible for livestock surveys meant for agricultural companies and enterprises as well as for farmers and family farms. Thus, livestock survey in Lithuania consists of two parts first one is livestock survey in agricultural companies and enterprises, the second one livestock survey in farmers and family farms. In 211 agricultural companies and enterprises full scale surveys are carried out quarterly and yearly. Agricultural companies and enterprises fill in the questionnaire themselves and send it directly to Statistics Lithuania for further processing. Data preparation divisions of Statistics Lithuania are responsible for coordination of this process and data checking. Since 2010, sample for surveys on the number of livestock and animal production on farmers and family farms are conducted on the basis of the Agricultural Census 2010 data as well as on the basis of the Animal Register. As many as 7000 farmers and family farms, breeding at least 1 number of animal from the total cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses and poultry, were recorded. The survey is carried out in all regions (municipalities). A sample survey of livestock is carried out once a year (in January). Since January 2011, the data collection from farmers and family farms process (survey fieldwork) is subcontracted, i.e. services of a market research company are purchased. Each year the market research company collects data from farmers and family farms. Data preparation divisions of Statistics Lithuania are responsible for entering the data from survey questionnaires to special computer program. The Agricultural and Environmental Statistics Division of Statistics Lithuania is responsible for data checking and editing Analysis of the data from the Animal Register The Animal Register is a state register which is created according to the requirements of EU regulations. The Animal Register is part of the IACS. An order on the registration of farm animals in the Animal Register was prepared according to the requirements of Council Directive 2008/71/EC of 15 July 2008 on the identification and registration of pigs, Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97 with last amendments made by the Council Regulation (EC) No 1791/2006, Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 2003 establishing a system for the identification and registration of ovine and caprine animals and amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Directives 92/102/EEC and 64/432/EEC with last Page 4 of 25

5 amendments made by Commission Regulation (EU) No 506/2010, Commission Regulation (EC) No 504/2008 of 6 June 2008 implementing Council Directives 90/426/EEC and 90/427/EEC as regards methods for the identification of equidae, and Commission Implementing Decision of 13 October 2011 recognising the fully operational character of the Lithuanian database for bovine animals. In 2005, Statistics Lithuania signed data provision agreement with the State Enterprise Agriculture and Rural Business Information Centre. This institution develops and maintains the functions of the Animal Register central database, develops, maintains and updates the Agriculture and Rural Business Register that is designed for the identification and registration of agricultural and rural holdings. Therefore, since 2005 Statistics Lithuania had a possibility to use some data from the Animal Register and the Agriculture and Rural Business Register. However, in these registers, there were much more data than Statistics Lithuania could see and use according to the valid data provision agreement. Statistics Lithuania had only an access to data on livestock which are registered one by one, i.e. cattle, sheep, goats and horses. However, since 2012 the registration of livestock by herds was started (for example all kinds of poultry, pigs, rabbits etc.). Therefore, first of all, an initial analysis of the Animal Register data to which Statistics Lithuania currently does not have access was made and consultations with the Agriculture and Rural Business Information Centre experts and IT specialists were performed. First meeting with the experts of the Agriculture and Rural Business Information Centre took place on 4 March The possibilities of getting access to data needed for conducting annual livestock survey as well as possible problems were discussed. The agreement was reached, and on 12 June 2014 Statistics Lithuania received data on livestock from the Animal Register. Data as of 31 December 2012 and 31 December 2013 were received. Data on number of all kind of livestock as well as livestock flow (birth, purchase, sail, slaughter, losses) during the period from 31 December 2012 to 31 December 2013 were received as well. These data were analysed, compared with livestock survey data at micro and macro level. Moreover, analysis of the Animal Register data to which Statistics Lithuania has access since 2005 was carried out Results of the analysis of the data from the Animal Register First of all, data on number of livestock which are registered in the Animal Register one by one, i.e. e. cattle, sheep, goats and horses, were analysed. Number of horses is important for national purposes; therefore, this indicator was analysed like other indicators (number of cattle, sheep, and goats) which are needed for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008. The analysis of the Animal Register data on livestock which is registered one by one, i.e. e. cattle, sheep, goats and horses, showed that methodological principles on number of livestock in the Animal Register and in statistical livestock survey are fully consistent. Therefore, it was decided that possibility to use the Animal Register data is realistic. Moreover, total number of cattle, sheep, goats and horses on 31 December 2013 in the Animal Register and statistical livestock survey was compared, and the comparison revealed that differences are insignificant (except goats, because very often goats holders do not register these farm animals because they keep them only for their own needs). Number of horses was analysed separately, paying more attention to the statistical survey methodology. Page 5 of 25

6 Name of livestock Number of livestock in the statistical livestock survey (reference date 31 December 2013) Number of livestock in the Animal Register (reference date 31 December 2013) Table 1 Difference (Survey data compared to Register data), % Cattle of which dairy cows Sheep Goats Horses In order to better understand differences, data obtained from farmers and family farms during the statistical survey were compared with data from the Animal Register at farm level (reference date 31 December 2013). First of all, number of cattle was analysed farmers and family farms out of 7000 farms selected for the statistical survey conducted on January 2014 have registered their cattle. 385 farms did not render the information (were not found or refused to render information). Thus, 4254 farms with cattle were analysed. Data presented for statistical survey and for the Animal Register were identical in 1855 farms (43.6 percent). Difference of 1 3 cattle was observed in 1494 farms (35.1 percent). 61 farms registered their cattle but during the statistical survey stated that they do not have cattle and, vice versa, 30 farms did not register their cattle but during the survey stated that they were breeding cattle. Thus, according to the results of the analysis, in 79 percent of farms differences of data in the statistical survey and in the Animal Register were insignificant. Number of cattle in surveyed farms on 31 December 2012 and 31 December 2013 is shown in figures 1 and 2. Figure 1. Number of cattle on 31 December 2012 in surveyed farms Page 6 of 25

7 Figure 2. Number of cattle on 31 December 2013 in surveyed farms Very similar situation was observed analysing number of dairy cows at farm level farmers and family farms out of 7000 farms selected for the statistical survey conducted on January 2014 have registered their dairy cows. 327 farms did not render the information (were not found or refused to render information). Thus, 3741 farms with dairy cows were analysed. Data presented for statistical survey and for the Animal Register were identical in 1735 farms (46.4 percent). Difference of 1 3 cows was observed in 1371 farms (36.6 percent). 117 farms registered their dairy cows but during the statistical survey stated that they do not have dairy cows and, vice versa, 361 farms did not register their dairy cows but during the survey stated that they were breeding dairy cows. Thus, according to the results of the analysis, in 83 percent of farms differences of data in the statistical survey and in the Animal Register were insignificant. Similar analysis was done with bulls (1 2 years old and 2 years old and older), heifers (1 2 years old and 2 years old and older), suckling and other cows. Situation was similar as in case of cattle (total) and dairy cows. Therefore, it was decided that number of cattle, dairy cows, bulls, heifers, suckling and other cows can be taken from the Animal Register and used for statistical survey purposes. The analysis of sheep in surveyed farms showed that 646 farmers and family farms out of 7000 registered sheep. 52 farms did not render information. Thus, 594 farms were analysed. It was found out that aggregated data of surveyed farmers and family farms (survey results and register data) were very similar while almost in half of surveyed farms number of sheep from survey and from register differed quit significantly (difference was more than 3 sheep). We assumed that the main reason was difference in number of lambs. Over the last few years number of seep increased significantly and differences in 2013 aggregated data are less than in It is showed in Figures 3 and 4. Page 7 of 25

8 Figure 3. Number of sheep on 31 December 2012 in surveyed farms Figure 4. Number of sheep on 31 December 2013 in surveyed farms Number of goats was analysed separately. The situation was a bit different. Analysis of farms with goats in the statistical survey showed that 48 percent (95 out of 199) of such farms does not register these farm animals in the Animal Register. These farms mostly keep 1 or 2 goats per farm. Therefore, difference between total number of goats in the statistical livestock survey and the Animal Register is quite significant (Table 1). However, number of goats in farms which have registered these farm animals and rendered information for the statistical livestock survey differs slightly. Data presented for the statistical survey and for the Animal Register were identical in 54 farms (51.9 percent). Difference of 1 3 goats was observed in 36 farms (34.6 percent). Thus, according to the results of the analysis in almost 86 percent of farms differences between data in the statistical survey and in the Animal Register were insignificant. Number of goats in surveyed farmers and family farms on 31 December 2012 and 31 December 2013 is shown in Figures 5 and 6. Page 8 of 25

9 Figure 5. Number of goats on 31 December 2012 in surveyed farms Figure 6. Number of goats on 31 December 2013 in surveyed farms After the analysis, it was decided that the number of cattle, dairy cows, bulls (1 2 years old and 2 years old and older), heifers (1 2 years old and 2 years old and older), suckling and other cows, sheep and goats can be taken from the Animal Register and used for the statistical survey purposes. In order to make sure that the decision was made correctly, the estimation of indicators for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 using the Animal Register data (reference date 31 December 2013) and farms from the previous statistical livestock survey sample was carried out. Name of livestock Number of livestock in the statistical livestock survey (reference date 31 December 2013) Number of livestock estimated using the Animal Register data (reference date 31 December 2013) Table 2 Difference (estimations with the Animal Register data compared to the Survey data), % Cattle of which dairy cows Sheep Goats The estimation showed that differences between number of livestock in the statistical livestock survey and the number of livestock estimated using the Animal Register data are insignificant as Page 9 of 25

10 well (see table 2). Reason why number of livestock estimated using the Animal Register data is smaller than that obtained during the survey is the fact that during the survey there were some farms which did not render their statistical data during the survey (were not found or refused to render information) and data of these farms were not used in the calculations. During estimations one more reason for these differences was found out. At the moment it is not possible to indicate the exact date when farm animal was registered to certain farm in the Animal Register. It is possible to see that, for example, on 1 December 2014 farm animal is in the farm. It means that date of getting the data from the Animal Register is very important. Time passed since the reference date to the date of data taking should be shorten as much as possible. Taking into account differences clarified during above mentioned analysis it was decided to prefill the statistical survey questionnaire with data from the Animal Register and to allow farmers to correct inaccurate numbers if needed. After the analysis of data on farm animals which are registered in the Animal Register one by one the analysis of those which are registered by herds was conducted. During this analysis it was found out that it is possible to use data from the Animal Register but these data should be prefilled into the statistical survey questionnaire as well and the possibility for farms to change this information during the survey should be given too. Such decision was taken because it was found out that farmers very often do not register their pigs, rabbits, poultry, beehives in the Animal Register if they keep a small number of these farm animals and keep them only for their own needs. Another reason why such decision was taken is legislative requirements in Lithuania. According to the legislation, farmers have an obligation to render information about farm animals which are registered by herds to the Animal Register at least 2 times per year. Exception was only for pigs. Herds of pigs should be registered at least once per quarter. Data on farm animals registered by herds are valid only during the current calendar year. Therefore, there is a possibility to get inaccurate data from the Animal Register. In order to motivate a decision to use prefilled data on farm animals from the Animal Register, total number of pigs, poultry, beehives, rabbits, foxes, mink, nutria on 31 December 2013 in the Animal Register and statistical livestock survey was compared. The comparison of total numbers showed that differences are quite significant and use of these data directly without asking about these animals during the survey is not feasible. Number of pigs, hens, geese, ducks, and rabbits in the survey is bigger than in the Animal Register because part of farmers and family farms keep a small number of these farm animals and do not declare these animals. Only big herds of these farm animals are declared. This situation was discussed with the Ministry of Agriculture as well as with representatives of institution managing the Animal Register. In case of turkeys, beehives, and mink situation is a bit different. Number of these farm animals in the survey is smaller than in the Animal Register. After analysis of data at micro level it was found out that some farms with these farm animals were not involved in survey population. Differences are shown in table 3. After the analysis we can predicate that use of the Animal Register data will improve quality of survey population as well as survey results. Page 10 of 25

11 Name of livestock Number of farm animals in the statistical livestock survey (reference date 31 December 2013) Number of farm animals in the Animal Register (reference date 31 December 2013) Table 3 Difference (Survey data compared to the Register data), % Pigs Hens Geese Ducks times Turkeys times Beehives Rabbits Foxes Mink times Nutria Also, data on livestock flow (birth, purchase, sail, slaughter, losses) in 2013 were analysed. Were analysed only those farms, which register cattle, sheep, goats, horses, because in the Animal Register these data are available only for those farm animals which are registered one by one. Such kind of data does not exist for farm animals which are registered by herds (pigs, rabbits, poultry, beehives, fur animals). In Table 4, number of farms which participated in the statistical survey 2014 (reference date 31 December 2013) and registered their livestock flows is shown. Total number of farms, which registered cattle, sheep, goats, horses Agricultural companies and enterprises Farmers and family farms Total Number of farms in statistical survey Number of farms which participated in statistical survey and registered cattle, sheep, goats, horses Number of farms which participated in statistical survey and registered livestock flows Table 4 As we can see from the table, 99 percent of farms which participated in the statistical survey and registered their cattle, sheep, goats and horses, registered flow of these farm animals as well. Page 11 of 25

12 However, deeper analysis showed that livestock flow balance (number of livestock on 31 December birth + purchase sail slaughter losses = number of livestock on 31 December 2013) is not correct almost in all farms. Therefore, data from the Animal Register on livestock flow cannot be used for the statistical survey purposes Decision on statistical livestock survey 2015 After the analysis it was decided that number of all kinds of farm animals can be taken from the Animal Register and used in statistical livestock survey in farmers and family farms. It was decided to prefill the questionnaires with all available information and during the survey to allow farms to correct inaccurate numbers. This decision was implemented and the new methodology was used during the annual statistical livestock survey 2015 (reference date 31 December 2014). The survey questionnaire can be found in the Annex. The statistical livestock survey fieldworks using this questionnaire were carried out on 2 23 January All characteristics which were prefilled with available information from the Animal Register are shown in this Annex (the statistical livestock survey questionnaire). Fields which are prefilled with the Animal Register data are marked as AD. For those characteristics from the Animal register which cannot be divided as it is required in the survey questionnaire the table with control fields was created. The fields which are filled in using table Control fields are marked as CF. However, this methodology cannot be used for the statistical livestock survey in agricultural companies and enterprises. For national purposes all agricultural companies should divide their data on livestock by regions. For example, one enterprise can keep their farm animals in several (in 2, 3 or 5) municipalities. In the survey questionnaire, they should indicate what number of livestock in which municipality is kept. Each agricultural company or enterprise must fill in one questionnaire for each municipality. It means that if livestock of a certain company is located in 3 municipalities, enterprise must fill in 3 questionnaires. Although the possibility to prefill e. questionnaires with data from administrative sources currently exists in the system of Statistics Lithuania for data collection from enterprises (e.statistics), at the moment there is no possibility to divide data on livestock from the Animal Register by municipalities. In the Animal Register all livestock is recorded in to one municipality in municipality where farm centre is located Results of the testing of the methodology developed Statistical livestock survey 2015 (reference date 31 December 2014) was conducted at the beginning of During this survey, in the questionnaire for farmers and family farms the following indicators were prefilled: - Total number of cattle (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of bulls (1 2 years old) on 31 December 2014; - Number of bulls (2 years old and older) on 31 December 2014; - Cows: - Dairy cows (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014) - Suckling cows on 31 December 2014 Page 12 of 25

13 - Other cows on 31 December Total number of pigs (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of fattening pigs, > 110 kg (8 month and more) on 31 December 2014; - Number of boards on 31 December 2014; - Total number of sheep (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Of which covered ewes and ewe lambs 1 year old and older (on 31 December 2014); - Total number of goats (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Of which goats and goats mated 1 year old and older (on 31 December 2014); - Total number of horses (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Of which mare 3 years old and older (on 31 December 2014); - Total number of rabbits (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Total number of foxes on 31 December 2014; - Total number of mink on 31 December 2014; - Total number nutria on 31 December 2014; - Total number beehives on 31 December 2014; - Total number of poultry (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of hens and cock (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of laying hens (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of broilers (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of geese (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of ducks (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of turkeys (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014); - Number of other poultry (on 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2014). Thus, all together 49 characteristics were taken from the Animal Register and prefilled to the statistical livestock survey questionnaire. Moreover, 5 control fields were created for those characteristics from the Animal register which cannot be divided as it is required in the survey questionnaire. These control fields were as follows: - Young cattle under 1 year. They should be divided into three groups: calves for slaughter; bulls for breeding; heifers for breeding. Such division of cattle does not exist in the Animal Register. - Heifers 1 to 2 years old. They should be divided into two groups: for slaughter; for breeding. Such division of cattle does not exist in the Animal Register. - Heifers 2 years old and older. They should be divided into two groups: for slaughter; for breeding. Such division of cattle does not exist in the Animal Register. - Piglets and pigs under 8 month. Division of these groups of pigs should be as follows: - Piglets: less than 20 kg (under 2 months); 20 to 50 kg (2 4 months); - Pigs under 8 month: 50 to 80 kg (4 6 months); 80 to 110 kg (6 8 months). Page 13 of 25

14 - Sows. They should be divided into two groups: mated sows; sows mated for the first time. As were mentioned above, the survey questionnaire with marked characteristics which were taken from the Animal Register and prefilled to the questionnaire (marked as AD) as well as control fields (marked CF) are attached in the Annex. The main results gained during the annual statistical livestock survey 2015 are shown in Table 5. Number of farm animals presented as of 31 December In the survey, using the Animal Register data Table 5 In the Animal Register Number of cattle, total Bulls and heifers under 1 years old Bulls 1 2 years old Heifers 1 2 years old Bulls 2 years old and older Heifers 2 years old and older Dairy cows Suckling and other cows Pigs, total Sheep, total Goats, total Horses, total Hens, total Geese Ducks Turkeys Rabbits Beehives Foxes Minks As it can be seen from Table 5, statistical survey results (using questionnaires, prefilled with the Animal Register data) were reliable. Therefore, the Animal Register data can be used for statistical purposes in the future. Page 14 of 25

15 3.6. Ensuring continuity of the project results In Lithuania, administrative data managers improve their data protection tools all the time. Statistics Lithuania should be able to follow new requirements and to take data from the administrative sources for statistical purposes in any suggested format. Due to this reason, the new agreement with the Agriculture and Rural Business Information Centre for receiving the Animal Register data was signed on 7 December In this agreement, it is stated that Statistics Lithuania will receive the Animal Register data via internet Web service. Preparation for implementation of this agreement was conducted successfully and all data from the Animal Register are available for using them for statistical survey needs. Moreover, new electronic statistical data preparation and transfer system e.statistics for the Population was established at Statistics Lithuania. Therefore, in the coming years (including 2016) statistical data from farmers and family farms during annual statistical livestock survey will be collected via this system. This system allows farmers and family farms to fill in and transmit to Statistics Lithuania survey questionnaires electronically. Regardless of these two above mentioned novelties (new data obtaining technique and new e.statistics system), the methodology developed during this project will be used in 2016 survey and afterwards. The Animal Register data necessary for the implementation of the developed methodology are received and are prefilled to the statistical livestock survey 2016 questionnaire. Only one difference could be mentioned electronic questionnaires will be used instead of paper questionnaires. Preparation for the livestock statistical survey 2016 (reference date 31 December 2015) was conducted in time and survey was started on 18 December Until 4 January 2016 farmers and family farms will fill in questionnaires themselves, from 4 January 2016 will start face to face interviews of those farms which will not fill in questionnaires themselves. 4. Analysis of the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data and possibility to use them for the Farm Structure Surveys (FSS) 4.1. Description of the Farm Structure Surveys (FSS) in Lithuania In Lithuania, the first FSS was carried out in 2003, i.e. before Lithuania s accession to the European Union. This FSS was carried out in the form of a census. The Agricultural Census 2003 took place 1 30 June The census was carried out by interviewers. The second FSS which was carried out in form of the census took place in May September During both censuses all farms (i.e. all agricultural holdings and small farms) were surveyed. Agricultural holdings, i.e. farmers and family farms, agricultural companies and enterprises with the utilized agricultural area of 1 or more hectares, as well as those with the utilized agricultural area of less than one hectare and annual agricultural income of not less than LTL 5000 approximately EUR 1448 per year, submitted statistical data on the agricultural area used, farm animals kept, agricultural machinery used, farm buildings, family members and farm workers working on a farm, agricultural production methods, and other (non-agricultural) activities. Small farms, i.e. farms with the utilised agricultural area of less than 1 hectare and income from agricultural activity per calendar year less than LTL 5000, submitted only the main data on land and farm animals for national data needs. During the period between the Agricultural Census 2003 and the Agricultural Census 2010, two sample FSS were carried out. The FSS 2005 took place on 1 22 June 2005; the FSS 2007 data collection took place on 1 29 June During both above mentioned surveys the survey questionnaire had to be filled in by all agricultural producers from the sample whose land plot Page 15 of 25

16 owned was no less than 1 hectare of utilised agricultural land. If the size of the land plot was less than 1 hectare of utilised agricultural land, the questionnaire was filled in only in case the income of the farm from agricultural activity over the calendar year amounted to no less than LTL 5000 approximately EUR 1448 per year. Small farms were not surveyed. The third FSS (sample survey) was carried out in This FSS took place on 15 September 30 November The survey questionnaire had to be filled in by the farms with the utilised agricultural area of one or more hectares or those with the utilised agricultural area of less than one hectare and annual agricultural income of no less than EUR Preparation for the survey started on July To meet the precision requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008, the sample included farmers and family farms. Moreover, 752 agricultural companies and enterprises were sampled. During the survey, agricultural companies and enterprises had to fill in the survey questionnaire themselves and send it directly to Statistics Lithuania for further processing. Farmers and family farms were questioned by interviewers. Interviewers collected statistical data using portable computers and entered them into a special program. This primary data entry program contained arithmetical and logical control tools. The data entered were sent to the Statistics Lithuania s database for further processing and checking. During the survey, 23 per cent of all active farms in Lithuania were surveyed. The sampling frame for the survey was the Statistical Register of Active Farms, which is regularly updated with data from different administrative sources and statistical surveys. Farmers and family farms were sampled using a stratified simple random sampling design. In case of agricultural companies and enterprises, an exhaustive (census) survey was used. Farmers and family farms were stratified by standard output and municipality: 5 strata by standard output and 60 strata by municipality. All agricultural companies and enterprises, organic farms, farms growing special crops (e.g. nut trees, nurseries, perennial plants for twining, weaving, energy purposes, flax, etc.), farms with the standard output valued at EUR 8 thousand and more were selected for the sample. The number of farms sampled totalled ; however, data were provided by farms, of which farmers and family farms, 681 agricultural companies and enterprises. Number of farms and their utilised land in is shown in the Table 6. Year Number of farms Land area, ha of which agricultural land utilised unutilised wooded area Table 6 other land (including waters) Apart of other characteristics, during the 2013 survey, it was aimed to find out the number of farm workers, i.e. persons who had been doing farm work 12 months prior to the survey (from 1 June Page 16 of 25

17 2012 to 31 May 2013), on farms of various categories and sizes, their distribution by sex and age, professional background in agriculture and time worked. According to the status of farm workers, 3 main groups were distinguished: farm holders and their family members, permanently hired workers, and temporarily hired workers. Based on the 2013 survey data, there were thousand farm workers on farms larger than 1 ha (52 per cent males, 48 per cent females). 94 per cent of farm workers worked on farmers and family farms, 6 per cent in agricultural companies and enterprises. The largest proportion (88 per cent) of farm workers were farm holders and their family members, slightly more than 11 per cent permanently, 0.8 per cent temporarily hired workers. 48 per cent of farmers and family farm workers were working on small farms (under 5 ha of agricultural land), 34 per cent on 5 20 ha farms, 18 per cent on farms larger than 20 ha. Permanent workers were usually hired by large farmers and family farms (with 100 and more hectares of utilised agricultural area): such farmers and family farms employed 58 per cent of permanently hired farm workers. Most of the workers of agricultural companies and enterprises (70 per cent) were working in agricultural companies and enterprises with 100 and more ha of agricultural land. Based on the 2013 survey data, most of the farm workers were working on a farm part-time. Only 11 per cent of farm workers were working on a farm full-time (in 2010, 7.5 per cent). 90 per cent of farm workers on farmers and family farms worked part-time, most of them (36 per cent) worked under 2 hours (in 2010, 94 and 45 per cent respectively). In agricultural companies and enterprises, 30 per cent of workers worked full-time (in 2010, 38 per cent). Number of farm workers in is shown in Table 7. Year Number of farm workers, total Farm holders and their family members Permanently hired workers Table 7 Temporarily hired workers During the FSS 2016 data checking, comparisons on micro and macro levels were done. Several administrative data sources, including IACS data, were used. Micro data of the FSS 2013 were compared with the following: IACS Crop Declaration Database was used for the comparisons of crops; Animal Register was used for the comparison of farm animals; State Social Insurance Fund Board Database was used for the comparison of labour force; National Paying Agency Database was used for the comparisons of the support for rural development; Other agricultural statistics surveys (crop production, animal survey, etc.). Page 17 of 25

18 Differences between the FSS 2013 data and other agricultural statistics surveys, as well as differences between the FSS 2013 data and the IACS Crop Declaration Database, the Animal Register, the State Social Insurance Fund Board Database were clarified. If necessary, holders were contacted (usually by phone) for additional information. Differences occurred mainly due to the differences in definitions and methodology. Macro data of the FSS 2013 were compared with the following: IACS Crop Declaration Database aggregated data; Animal Register aggregated data; National Paying Agency Database aggregated data; Census 2003, FSS 2005, FSS 2007 and Census 2010 aggregated data; Other agricultural statistics surveys (crop production, animal survey, etc.). If comparisons showed large discrepancies on some variable(s), it was returned to the micro level and comparisons of micro data were done in greater detail. However, comparison of FSS data with the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data was not carried out. One of the aims of this project is to conduct such comparison and to identify of the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data which could be used for FSS 2016 and beyond Information about the Agriculture and Rural Business Register The Agriculture and Rural Business Register is part of IACS. This Register contains information about structure of agricultural holdings. Manager of this register is the State Enterprise Agricultural Information and Rural Business Centre. The Register information is used to ensure efficient administration of EU and national support for agriculture and rural development, promptly provide complete and accurate information on the structural changes in the agricultural for governmental authorities and the public. In Lithuania this Register established in From 2002 to 2011 number of agricultural holdings in this Register was stable about 345 thousand. At the same time results of the FSS showed that number of agricultural holdings is much less (number of farms in FSS is shown in Table 6). Thus, it was clear that use of the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data for FSS 2005, FSS 2007 and Census 2010 is not feasible. Situation in this Register has changed when in 2011 the new version of Register articles was adopted. In this new version two important possibilities were legalized: the possibility to unregister holding, if manager of this holding was dead and within a specified time period the inheritor of this holding not appear; the possibility to unregister holding in simplified order, if during three years period data of certain holding were not updated. These possibilities allowed unregistering holdings which during several last years have not performed agricultural activity and data in the Register did not comply with the real situation. Number of agricultural holdings in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register is shown in Figure 7. In this figure the information of Agricultural Information and Rural Business Centre is presented. Page 18 of 25

19 Figure 7. Number of agricultural holdings in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register As it can be seen from Figure 7, even after the corrections which were done in the Register, number of holdings in this Register is bigger than number of farms from the FSS 2013 (in the Register thousand, in the FSS thousand. In Lithuania, according to the national rules of support for agriculture, farms which apply for direct payments should be registered in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register thousand holdings applied for subsidies in 2013, i.e. declared their utilised agricultural land to IACS, while in the Register, thousand holdings were registered. It means that in 2013 only 75 percent of holdings declared their utilised agricultural land to IACS. Thus, in the Register there were 50.7 thousand holdings which did not register to IACS. According to the Census 2010 results, in 2010, 86 percent of farms declared their agricultural land to IACS. Thus, according to the analysis described above, we can predicate, that number of active farms in Lithuania can be less than number of registered agricultural holdings in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register. On the other hand, not all holdings which belong to the agricultural statistical surveys population are registered in above mentioned register, because in Lithuania there is no obligation to register holding if holding does not provide application for support (holding not receive support). Moreover, in Lithuania keepers of farm animals can register their farm animals in the Animal Register without registering holding in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register. Therefore, number of farms, which can be involved in the FSS, is not equal to number of agricultural holdings, registered in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register. Bearing in mind all these above mentioned discrepancies, we can predicate, that methodological differences in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register and FSS 2013 are significant and should be analysed deeper Analysis and comparison of FSS 2013 and the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data Whereas until now Statistics Lithuania used only State Social Insurance Fund Board Database for the comparison of labour regularly employed, it was decided to analyse the possibility to use the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data for FSS needs. First of all methodological documents Page 19 of 25

20 of this Register were analysed. Furthermore, the manager of the Agriculture and Rural Business Register the State Enterprise Agricultural Information and Rural Business Centre was consulted bilaterally. After that, data of holdings, which were in the Register on 1 June 2013, were taken farms which participated in the FSS 2013 (out of farms which rendered statistical data for the FSS 2013) have registered agricultural holding in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register. However, after the analysis it was clarified that in 65 cases farmer who in FSS 2013 indicated that he is a farm holder, was registered in the Register as member of family of another farm holder, in 92 cases registered as partner of another farm holder. It means that person, who in the FSS 2013 population was involved as farm holder, in the Register was not indicated as a holder. One more interesting sighting 204 agricultural holdings which presented their data for FSS 2013 were unregistered from the Agriculture and Rural Business Register before reference date of FSS Reasons for that are not known. Moreover, total number of members of registered holdings was analysed. First of all, data of farms which participated in the FSS 2013 and presented their statistical data were analysed. Statistical data were taken from the FSS 2013 as well as available data were taken from the Agriculture and Rural Business Register. The comparison is shown in Table 8. In agricultural companies and enterprises Total number of farm workers according to the Agriculture and Rural Business Register (available data of holdings) Table 8 Total number of holdings members according to the FSS 2013 (data of holdings) In farmers and family farms In all farms As it can be seen from Table 8, differences are significant. We assume that only those persons who have land or farm animals are registered in the Agriculture and Rural Business Register as members of the holdings. Work on the farm is not so important. Therefore, if certain family member work in the farm, but does not have land or farm animals, this person in most cases are not registered in the Register as member of the holding. For the sake of clarity, number of farm workers using the Register data instead of the FSS 2013 data was estimated (extrapolation was done). Results of this estimation are shown in Table 9. Whereas, all agricultural companies and enterprises were surveyed and they were involved in the survey sample with the probability 1, results of this estimation for agricultural companies and enterprises is the same as in Table 8. Page 20 of 25

21 In agricultural companies and enterprises Total number of farm workers estimated using the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data Table 9 Total number of farm workers estimated using FSS 2013 data In farmers and family farms In all farms It was found out that differences are significant as well, and reasons of these differences should be clarified. Big difference in agricultural companies and enterprises has led to the idea that only family members of the farm holder and partners are registered in the Register. However, permanently hired workers are not involved as holding members. In case of agricultural companies and enterprises, only a farm holder is registered as a member of holding. This issue was discussed with the manager of this Register the State Enterprise Agricultural Information and Rural Business Centre. It was clarified that during registration of the holding a holder should present information about workers working in the holding. However, holders should indicate only a few matters: if they work on regularly basis or not; how long they work (number of months) in the holding. Therefore, this information is not sufficient for the FSS purposes. Next comparison was done involving only farm holders and their family members. Results of this comparison are shown in Table 10. In agricultural companies and enterprises Total number of farm holders and their family members estimated using the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data Table 10 Total number of farm holders and their family members estimated using FSS 2013 data In farmers and family farms In all farms Decision on using the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data in the FSS From the analysis described above it is clear that the Agriculture and Rural Business Register data on labour force cannot be used for agricultural companies and enterprises because data on farm workers working on regularly basis is not sufficient for the FSS. It is better to use data from the State Social Insurance Fund Board Database. However, direct use of the Social Insurance Fund Board Database is not feasible because in this Database all workers working on the company or enterprise regardless of their scope of work are recorded. It means that we cannot see from this database if worker do farm work or any other work. Page 21 of 25