Revision of the UN List of Industrial Products

Transcription

1 I. INTRODUCTION Revision of the UN List of Industrial Products 1. The UN List of Industrial Products was developed in the framework of the 1973 world programme on Industrial statistics. The methodology of the development of the List and the List itself are available in the publication ST/STAT/SER.M/54/II. 2. The world programme dealt with the organization and conduct of industrial inquiries and indicators that were going to be compiled in the framework of this programme. The aim of the programme was to guide and coordinate national activity in industrial census-taking with a view to broadening the scope and improving the comparability of the statistical information on industry available on an international basis. 3. The UN List of Industrial Products was a part of this programme. This List was prepared to be used as a guide in reporting and collecting data on major industrial products for all countries and areas of the world. The List was a tool among others, to observe and compare industrial production on a worldwide basis. 4. The data collection process based on it consists on the purest form of product statistics; the data collected have been and are annual physical quantity production data within the national boundaries of each country and area. 5. This List is not a comprehensive one. Since it was developed, it was not intended to take the place of a comprehensive classification of products and materials. It is a list of selected products, which are mainly outputs of Mining, Manufacturing, Electricity and Gas. It was meant to provide a satisfactory standard for the international reporting of data on industrial commodities, thus serving as an international comparability tool. 6. The definitions of the products of the List were largely based on the Explanatory Notes of the Brussels Tariff Nomenclature (Customs Cooperation Council, Explanatory Notes to the Brussels Nomenclature, Brussels 1955) and adapted and modified on the basis of national practices and comments received. Over time, the differences between definitions in the List and existing product classifications have grown substantially. 7. The data are collected through the UN Questionnaire on Commodity Production Statistics sent annually to National Statistical Offices worldwide. UNSD maintains the Commodity Statistics Database which is updated and amended annually as well as publishes the annual publication Industrial Commodity Statistics Yearbook.

2 II. REVISION OF THE LIST 8. The revision of the List has been overdue for a long time. UNSD has worked on the revision and is now in the final stage of producing a draft new List. After selected discussions on earlier drafts, UNSD is now seeking input from all national statistical offices. 9. The main goals of the revision have been: a. To update the List with the relevant products of today s economies and in general to review the content of the List. For this, efforts have been made to consider national product lists as well as to look at trade data in order to capture the important commodities and to achieve a satisfactory and balanced coverage. b. To include the most relevant products for each individual ISIC industry (for mining and manufacturing). c. To have a clear methodological basis for the new List, related to the definition of products. The definition and coding of the commodities in the draft new List is now based on CPC with further detailing when necessary. The definition of the products in the List has been made compliant with existing detail in the Harmonized System (HS) 2002, allowing for better comparability of production data and trade data, as well as considering the fact that many countries use HS-based product lists. Also provided in the new List is a link to PRODCOM, which should be of use for all countries that are collecting commodity data on that basis. 10. The intent is still to have only a list of selected products for which data will be collected, rather than collecting data on the full range of CPC products. The criteria for selection of the products to be included in the new List remain largely the same as the criteria used for drafting the 1973 List stated in the publication ST/STAT/SER.M/54/II. 11. UNSD intends to use the new List of industrial products for its data collection on commodity production starting with the data collection cycle for the 2004 production data. UNSD intends to collect data not only in physical quantities, but also in terms of monetary value. 12. The draft revised List of industrial products is available on the UNSD website under:

3 III. QUESTIONS 13. While we are still in the final stage of drafting, we would like to have your feedback on the following questions regarding the general data collection on commodity production, the proposed guidelines for data collection, as well as the actual proposed list of industrial products: - Q1: Does the industrial commodity production data collection take place in your country and how often? Is it feasible to ask for annual data on commodity production? - A1: CZSO carry out monthly survey on total production and annual survey on production sold. The level of detail corresponds to the PRODCOM List. Due to this reason annual data supply on commodity production is feasible. - Q2: Through what surveys does the above data collection take place? What is the scope of the surveys conducted? What are the institutions involved with commodity production data collection? - A2: Data on production of industrial products are colleted via monthly questionnaire Prum 2-12 and annual questionnaire Prum Both surveys are exhaustive for enterprises with prevailing industrial activity and 20 or more employees. It is standard survey carried out by CZSO, no other institutions are involved in the data collection. - Q3: Is the reporting on commodity production data done alongside the reporting for other indicators of industrial production? Which are these other indicators? Are the commodity production data reported or derived/estimated? - A3: Data on production are not derived/estimated but reported in the frame of above mentioned surveys. As concerns collected indicators, see point A1. We survey both physical volume and monetary value. - Q4: Which are the main uses or applications of commodity production data collected in your country? Do you use commodity production data for the calculation of price indices? - A4: Statistics on production serve as a source of absolute figures on production (which are regulary published when allowed by confinentialty rules) and as the main input into monthly IPI calculation. Price statistics is also one of the users of these data (annual results used for the weights construction and selection of representants). However, monthly price indices depends on separete survey. Above mentioned product statistics do not represents regular monthly input in PPI calculation.

4 - Q5: The international recommendations for industrial statistics have stated in the past, among others, that: Measurement of production and consumption in terms of value is considered to be of secondary importance for the world programme of industrial statistics. Not only is a considerable element of production or consumption in each country not subject to valuation in any substantive sense but, even where values can be readily reported, international comparisons and aggregation are rendered difficult by the general lack of uniformity in the basis of valuation and by the absence of satisfactory factors for currency conversion. (ST/STAT/SER.M/54/II; pg.5) Do you think this is the case nowadays in your country? What do you consider most useful, to have reporting in physical volume or in value? What reporting is possible in your country, in physical volume or in monetary values? Are there areas where reporting in both is possible? Are there product- (or product-group-) specific preferences for choosing one type over the other? - A5: From the view of international comparison the accent on physical volume still seems to be the most reasonable. Monetary value may be affected by national methodologies where methods of valuation are not always identical. Please see point Q11. At the moment there are heavy discusion within PRODCOM Commitee which shows how hard is to achieve any agreement even on the EU level where higher level of comparability should probably be expected. Due to this reason the above mentioned statement is probaly not as old-fashioned as it seems on the first sight. CZSO currently survey both volume and value for all the products where possible. There are logical exceptions when the propper volume unit is hard to choose (heterogenous product groups, etc.). Physical voleme is still considered to be of great importance. - Q6: From your country s perspective, do you see any importance in having such a data collection on commodity production at the international level? - This question obviously belongs to the users of comparable production statistics on the international level. UN is probably more acquaint with the needs of such users. However, we suppose that comparable product statistics is not without any importance. - Q7: Do you agree with the continued approach of using a selected list of products only? Or do you prefer a comprehensive data collection, such as for the complete detail of the CPC, the complete detail of the HS or others? If you prefer others, at what level of detail should this data collection take place? What other features would you like this List to have, that can be reflected in the data collected? - A7: We consider the current approach absolutely acceptable.

5 - Q8: Are there any additional products of international importance that should be included in the List? - A8: We do not have such information. - Q9: Do you agree with the guidelines for type of production to be measured, as set out in the General notes on the List of Industrial Products? - A9: CZSO currently deals with two production types (total production and production) and we can accept the current guidelines. However, due to the historical reasons we put more attention to the total production. - Q10: How is the measurement and valuation of contract processing handled in your country? Are there specific advantages or problems with this approach? (A recommendation for this commodity list is still being discussed, considering the outcome of related questions in the SNA and BOP revisions. Current country practices should be an input in this discussion.) - A10: The question of contract processing is very serious, also due to the internation dimension of relations between enterprises. In general the valuation principles are cloesely linked with the entity who reports production. There are two possibilities production can be reported by the physical producer or by the owner of the final product. Both approaches have advatages and disadvantages. The first approach means that only the fee paid can be reported because the material is supplied free of charge and the whole price is unknown. The second approach brings several practical problems (territorial aspects, classfication of the principal according to the prevailing activity, its size class, etc). CZSO currently accepts contractor (physical producer) as the reporting unit. This approach had previously been agreed in the PRODCOM statistics but the whole issue is currently under discussion again. In the future our national practice may be revised with regard to the reached agreement. - Q11: Can you give an estimate, for how many of the products included in the new List you will be able to provide data (in physical quantity or in monetary value)? - A11: The data can be provided for all products where conversion from the PRODCOM List is possible. - Q12: Do you have specific comments on any of the products included in the revised List? - A12: No specific comments.