Attendees:
UCD: Alan Renwick
DAFM: Ann Derwin, Graham Neilan, Deirdre Fay, Damien Flynn, Ronan Gleeson.
Teagasc: Brian Moran, Thia Hennessey, Trevor Donnellan.
EPA: Jane Brogan, Philip O’Brien, Dr. Ibrahim Khalil.
Bord Bia: Eoin Kelly
CSO: Paul J.Crowley , Gerry Reilly, Hilda McCarthy, Kathryn Foskin , Susan O’Connor, Viacheslav Voronovich, Carmel Hinchion, Paul M. Crowley, Brian Ring, Reamonn McKeever.
Apologies:
Rowena Dwyer (IFA), Bernard Hyde (EPA), Joe Treacy (CSO)
Ann Derwin opened the meeting and invited everyone to briefly introduce themselves to other members of the Group. Paul J Crowley outlined the new format for the meeting. Topics for discussion were requested in advance and these suggestions formed the basis of the agenda, through individual presentations by CSO and other members and a Q&A session. Paul outlined the priorities in CSO Agriculture Division for 2015 along with EU priorities, namely the development of a new strategy for Agriculture Statistics - Agriculture 2020 and beyond. CSO compliance with EU obligations is very good. He also mentioned the Court of Auditors audit of farm income statistics and performance indicators, highlighting that it is investigating the European instruments for measuring farm incomes, rather than a specific audit of member state’s surveys. He also highlighted an issue arising from Article 117 of Regulation 1306/2013 regarding the use of administrative data for statistical purposes. The correct interpretation of this point remains to be clarified at a European level.
(1) CSO Agriculture
11.10-11.15am Land Prices/Rents (Susan O'Connor, CSO)
Susan O’Connor summarised the current situation where land price and land rent statistics are based on voluntary agreements but Eurostat are seeking to include them in a regulation. Susan outlined the various definitions being used as well as some inclusions & exclusions in determining average price of land. The prices compiled for 2013 excluded mixed-use transactions (i.e. both residential and non-residential e.g. land sold with house) and transactions with a consideration value of <€100. A provisional timetable for disseminating results was presented. Data for 2014 will be transmitted to Eurostat in Sept 2015 and published by Dec 2015. A review of sources and methodologies is ongoing.
11.15-11.25am Agricultural Accounts- Methodological Changes (Viacheslav Voronovich, CSO)
Viacheslav Voronovich outlined current methodology for, and proposed changes to, calculation of Intermediate Consumption in Agriculture Accounts. The main issue with the current approach is that the Teagasc NFS frame (source of data) only covers farms with average Standard output of >=€8,000 (cut-off had been >=€4,000SO up to 2012). Therefore, the average value for larger farms is being applied to all farms including smaller farms, thereby overestimating expenditure. Viacheslav explained the new methodology proposed which will be an improvement and will more accurately reflect the consumption of smaller farms. CSO intends to introduce this methodological change with the publication of the final estimates of Output, Income and Income in Agriculture 2014.
11.25-11.35am Discussion
Alan Renwick (UCD) asked CSO about how to deal with farms with mixed type land and how to differentiate between arable land and permanent grassland in the estimation of agricultural land prices. Susan intends to examine data from Census of Agriculture 2010 to try to identify the dominant land type but at an overall level she did not expect there to be much of a price differential between the two land types.
Ann Derwin (DAFM) asked about the exclusion of inheritance transfers of land and also asked about temporary land transfers (long-term leasing) which is a practice being encouraged under current farm taxation policy. There is a data gap here and any additional data would be welcome.
Trevor Donnellan (Teagasc) asked if the exclusion of transactions including a dwelling was just a temporary measure. Susan (CSO) explained that Eurostat require only agricultural land values but there would be a possibility of creating a separate data table of land prices which would include buildings.
Ann Derwin (DAFM) asked what the sample size was, given the exclusions. Susan (CSO) informed group that the sample includes approximately 3,600 observations per annum.
Thia Hennessy (Teagasc) asked if there was an upper limit to the value of land transactions. CSO confirmed that there was no upper limit applied. Thia also asked Ann (DAFM) if long-term leasing of land was required to be registered to avail of taxation incentives. Ann confirmed this would be the case. Thia informed the group that term of tenure is now collected within National Farm Survey (NFS).
Trevor Donnellan added that Teagasc is now producing a land price series in conjunction with Society of Chartered Surveyors which has 4-5 years data and might be of interest.
Regarding average NFS values for calculating Intermediate Consumption items, Thia confirmed to Viacheslav (CSO) that Teagasc are now proposing to run a survey of 200 small farms (0-20ha) which will be repeated every 5 years and this will help the CSO in the estimation of intermediate consumption on small farms.
Alan Renwick asked if any modelling could be done on the Teagasc NFS data to investigate relationship between farm size and Intermediate Consumption. This could be investigated within the NFS microdata.
11.35-11.50am Measuring the Sustainability of Irish Farming using the Teagasc National Farm Survey (Thia Hennessy, Teagasc)
Thia Hennessy outlined the collection of sustainability indicators (Economic, Environmental, Social and Innovation) and in particular the environmental data which is a new development within NFS. Counting Carbon has two possible approaches: IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) vs LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) approach. Teagasc used the IPCC approach which allows the user to look at efficiency at product level and compare to profit levels, etc. The LCA approach is more labour intensive and requires additional data around inputs, practices and outputs.
Thia outlined future plans for similar data collection/analysis which is to include beef farms, increase the length of the times series, develop better use of geo-code data and develop better measures of innovation. This work will allow for enriched analysis of environmental data as it can be linked directly to economic and social data in the NFS.
11:50-12.05 The Farm Hazardous waste Collection Campaign (Jane Brogan, EPA)
The Waste Collection Campaign was carried out in collaboration with EPA, Teagasc and DAFM. Hazardous Waste (HW) fell under EPA’s area of interest; farmers needed an outlet for farm HW and DAFM also had an interest in having HW removed from farms under cross-compliance. Sixteen locations were set-up nationwide during 2013/2014. Some waste could be disposed of free of charge and the remainder at €2 per kilo.
Using data from an on-site survey carried out on collection day, EPA now intends to produce national waste estimates by farm type and size.
A further 10 centres will be provided in 2015 and then a National Scheme is to be established.
12.05-12.15 Discussion
Alan Renwick (UCD) warned about the potential bias in using data from a sample who delivered waste to calculate national totals for a population which includes those who did not deliver waste. EPA and CSO (KF) will discuss this further.
Deirdre Fay (DAFM): Asked Thia about calculating ‘whole-farm’ v’s ‘farm-gate’ Nutrient Balances. Is there scope to measure the threat to water quality using soil samples in NFS? Could data on slurry storage, capacity and timing and method of application be captured in NFS? Thia (Teagasc) confirmed this has been raised but considered expensive. Deirdre Fay (DAFM) explained that overall national storage capacity is adequate but that there could be certain geographical areas with inadequate capacity.
Ann Derwin (DAFM) was surprised at amount of animal remedies/medicines collected in HW collection centres. Had assumed the suppliers were obliged to manage returns. EPA confirmed this is only the case for unopened products.
Philip O’Brien (EPA) commented on the risk of transporting HW and that EPA had given some guidance on how to safely transport waste to the waste centre.
12:15-12.25 Farm data and the Household Budget Survey (Paul M. Crowley, CSO)
Paul M. Crowley explained the historical link between the Household Budget Survey (HBS) and farm households. This link was broken in the 2009/2010 HBS and there is no intention to re-establish it. The function of the HBS is to collect consumption data using comprehensive Census of Population data for sampling purposes and maximising the use of administrative data. EU SILC is the official source of Income. The 5-yearly HBS will in the future be conducted annually on a smaller sample on a three year rolling cycle.
From 2017, Household data collection will be transformed with four surveys in the field together and as a result HBS will no longer be a stand-alone survey. The sample will be stratified by Deprivation Index using Census Small Area population data which has approximately 17,000 small areas (each with 80-100 households). The field force will be used across all four surveys so the surveys will need to be well-coordinated and all small areas exhausted. The practice of substitution of households will be discontinued as this is not a statistically sound practice.
Thia Hennessy (Teagasc) asked how farm households were represented in EU SILC survey.
Paul explained that when sampling according to Census small-area data, survey samples have a proportionate number of farm households in its sample as was the case for the recent Household Finance & Consumption Survey (HFCS). The HFCS achieved a sample of 5,419 households, of which 450 were farm households. The results, however, were not published by farm v’s non-farm households. The HFCS data did include asset type and where land was the asset, this was considered to be mainly farm land. The HFCS did collect the method of acquisition of the land. Gerry Reilly (CSO) added that both HBS & HFCS provided gross income results that were very close to that provided by SILC data.
12:25-12.35 Agricultural employment data in the QNHS (Brian Ring, CSO)
Brian Ring provided an introduction to Quarterly National Household Survey (QNHS) which is the official source of employment data. The current sample is 26,000 households with a response of 19,000-19,500 achieved per quarter. The sample is updated every 5 years and a new sample is rotated in over 5 quarters. New samples were introduced in 1997 and again in 2003. The new sample introduced in 2009 (Q1) was based on Census of Population (COP) 2006 and the most recent sample introduced in 2012(Q4) based on COP 2011.
The fall in agriculture employment seen in 2010 is considered to be largely due to the impact of the 2009 sample. There was a delay in getting COP2006 population data and household structures in general were also undergoing significant change at this time. The results were flagged in the statistical release at the time as being questionable. The 2014 (Q4) sample saw the reciprocal of the 2010 results where over the five quarters, agriculture employment levels were brought up to where they previously had been. The CSO has given a commitment to try reproduce a more coherent and consistent series. The aim will be to adjust weights upwards for farm households using auxiliary data starting with 2011 (Q2) and working backwards from there. However, due to resource issues, the CSO cannot currently commit to a timeframe for this work.
Regarding the most recent results for 2014(Q4), Brian confirmed that there will always be some inherent variability in a sample survey. The coefficient of variation is highest in the agriculture sector and this is due to the clustered nature of agriculture employment within geographical areas.
Graham Neilan (DAFM) thanked Brian for his ongoing help with QNHS results & queries.
Ann Derwin (DAFM) stated that from a policy perspective, it can be frustrating to be faced with a lack of data for agriculture sector in considering areas such as third-level education grants, education in sector in general, DAFM scheme design, taxation, farm succession and farm viability. There are data gaps around the number of young farmers coming through and the number of women in farming.
CSO pointed to the Census of Population (COP) as a possible data source. If DAFM want to compile a list of questions/data needs, the possibility of disaggregating COP data for farm households could be looked at. CSO will provide the relevant contact point for same. Hilda McCarthy pointed out that only the main occupation was collected in COP and therefore not all households with farming activity would be identifiable on COP.
Alan Renwick (UCD) asked if what we’ve seen in QNHS is only a statistical anomaly and whether or not we should be reporting at all if there was no real change to be seen. CSO responded that it wouldn’t be possible to withdraw the report or a sector from the report.
1. Memorandum of Understanding with DAFM (Gerry Reilly, CSO)
Gerry O’Reilly has prepared a new draft MOU and will exchange with Graham (DAFM) and discuss.
2. Other possible sources of farm-related data, e.g. SILC (Gerry Reilly, CSO)
This was covered in earlier discussion.
3. Meat Supply Balance (Viacheslav Voronovich, CSO)
Viacheslav Voronovich explained that Eurostat has withdrawn their methodological support for Supply Balances. When extracting trade data, CSO would previously have received a revised list of CN codes from ESTAT each year along with a conversion coefficient for each of these CN codes to allow conversion of the product back to carcass weight. There is also a significant lack of domestic consumption data. The meat supply balance cannot be completed without these elements. Eoin Kelly (Bord Bia) suggested that Bord Bia may be able to assist in providing coefficients and consumption data at retail level. Viacheslav (CSO) also told the group that Eurostat are considering re-introduction of cereal supply balance for the main cereals.
Trevor Donnellan (Teagasc) said it has been suggested to him that Supply Balances may be re-introduced under a Directive. Trevor could also provide the name of an ex-ESTAT colleague now working in Netherlands that may be able to assist with Supply Balances.
Bord Bia would like to receive monthly livestock slaughtering for poultry. Reamonn McKeever (CSO, Environment) would also like to receive poultry data. CSO explained the poultry slaughterings data comes from DAFM so that decision should be theirs. Bord Bia asked if slaughterings data could be broken down by local abattoir v’s export plants.
4. Retail Prices and Wholesale Prices (Susan O'Connor, CSO)
Susan O’Connor will provide contact points in CSO for both retail & wholesale prices. Bord Bia would like to identify price per kilo for meat items in both wholesale and retail sector. CSO pointed out that data could only be provided for goods that were in the CPI basket of goods and services
5. Farm Structure Survey 2016 Stakeholder consultation (Kathryn Foskin, CSO)
Kathryn Foskin will be completing the FSS2016 grant application in the coming fortnight. Due to changes to regulation, the questionnaire will be re-designed with the possibility of the development of an e-questionnaire also to be considered. The group was invited to submit any requests for additional data which would be considered by CSO. A link to the proposed FSS2016 regulation will be forwarded to the group.
An e-publication will be used for publication of FSS2013 results. No hard copies will be printed.
Close:
Ann Derwin thanked the group for their participation and asked that minutes and slides be circulated. The group agreed to meet annually unless a need arose for more frequent meetings.
