THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL SURVEYS IN EUROPE. Christine Wirtz - Eurostat

Transcription

1 THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL SURVEYS IN EUROPE Christine Wirtz - Eurostat

2 1. Social statistics in the ESS 2. Harmonisation of social statistics 3. Social policy in relation to living conditions 4. European Social Statistics - from ECHP towards EU-SILC 5. Potential use of CHINTEX results 2

3 Social Statistics in the ESS (1) Organisation Eurostat: Part of the European Statistical System (ESS) Eurostat: Directorate General of the European Commission Directorate E (Social statistics): One out of seven Eurostat Directorates 3

4 Social Statistics in the ESS (2) Main surveys Labour Force Survey (LFS) European Community Household Panel (ECHP) Household Budget Surveys (HBS) Others (Time Use Survey, Ad Hoc-Module, ) 4

5 Social Statistics in the ESS (3) Political context Amsterdam treaty From Luxembourg to Nice and ahead EMU - action plan National action plans (Employment, Social Inclusion) High level Committees (EPC, EC, SPC) Structural indicators and economic indicators 5

6 Social statistics in the ESS (4) Current situation Political level determines requirements But the European Commission initiates the Statisticians advice (Sub-committees for indicators; inside the Commission/Eurostat/ESS) Increase of data requests and urgency Fast changing political priorities ESS has to be flexibel and provide up-to-date answers 6

7 Social statistics in the ESS (5) How to do the impossible? Do what is really needed Explain to users New requirements imply costs Think about new ways (European Surveys; Stratification by country) European interest above national interest (SPC Mai 2001). Hope for more convergency 7 (institutional; ESS)

8 Harmonisation Why harmonised EU Statistics? Comparability between Member States Aggregation to EU-level Facilitate decision in community policy areas Promote European Integration through relevant information across the EU Evaluate political actions (benchmarking) 8

9 Arguments against harmonisation? Sovereignty of Member States National differences (legal, social, economic) Continuity and tradition Adaptation costs Risk of non-acceptance Community requirements not recognised Missing legal basis 9

10 Possible forms of harmonisation Output harmonisation (HBS) Input harmonisation (ECHP) Target-structure harmonisation (LFS) Mixed harmonisation (EU-SILC) 10

11 Harmonisation - What happened so far? Formal start of harmonisation work in social statistics in November 1996 Recommendations concerning Units (Household, Dwelling, Place of Residence) Variables (Age, Activity status, Main activity) Classifications (NUTS, ISCO, NACE,...) Open issues: Income, Household types... 11

12 Social Policy in relation to living conditions Article 136: Amsterdam Treaty The Community and the MS shall have as their objectives the promotion of employment, improved living and working conditions,.. and the combating of exclusion. Article 284: The Commission may collect any information required for the performance of the tasks entrusted to it. 12

13 Social Policy in relation to living conditions Lisbon European Council (23-24/03/2000) Adoption of a socio-economic strategy to transform the EU into the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion Annual report and indicators in four policy domains: Employment Innovation Economic reform 13 Social cohesion

14 Social Policy in relation to living conditions Social cohesion Steps must be taken to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty by setting adequate targets. Council and Commission are invited to promote a better understanding of social exclusion through continued dialogue and exchange of information and best practice on the basis of commonly agreed indicators. 14

15 Social Policy in relation to living conditions Commission response: Programme of Community action to encourage co-operation between Member States (MS) to combat social exclusion To promote the collection and dissemination of comparable statistics in MS at Community level The European Commission s Communication on structural indicators, including: indicator on inequality of income distributions poverty rates before and after social transfers persistence of poverty 15

16 EUROSTAT S RESPONSE In the 80 s : HBS (Household Budget Surveys) In the 90 s : ECHP (European Community Household Panel) Today : EU-SILC (Statistics on Income and Living Conditions) 16

17 Why the ECHP? Demand for information on income of households and persons at community level 1991: Task-force household income Aim: Output-Harmonisation Decision: Launch a special EU-wide harmonised survey on income and living conditions 17

18 ECHP SCOPE and CONTENT: EU survey providing data on income, labour, education and training, health, housing, social participation, satisfaction, demographic information, financial situation Eurostat collects national micro data sets and transforms them into a user database format Co-operation with Member States according to Gentlemen s Agreement 18

19 ECHP Annual survey over an 8-year period ( ) 14-nation Community survey 12 countries in 1994 Austria joined in 1995, Finland in 1996 Comparable data for Sweden from 1997 Sample size: households adults 19

20 ECHP 3 main characteristics: Multi-dimensional coverage to study interrelationships at micro-level Cross-national comparability based on a common blue-print questionnaire Longitudinal or panel design to study transitions and consequences of certain events 20

21 USE OF ECHP DATA ECHP Analysis of income distribution in the EU Social benefits and their redistributive effect in the EU Low income and low pay in a household context Dynamic measures of economic activity and unemployment ECHP UDB: used by the research community 21

22 Towards EU-SILC (Statistics on Income and Living Conditions) Adapting statistics to today s emerging demands 22

23 EU-SILC WHY REPLACE THE ECHP? Update content according to new political demands (Lisbon, Nice) Needs for operational improvements, mainly timeliness Integration in National Statistical Systems New survey Adapting national sources (Registers or surveys) Distribution of tasks between NSIs and Eurostat 23

24 EU-SILC - Characteristics EU reference source for: Comparative income distribution Social exclusion statistics Legal basis: a Regulation of the Council and the European Parliament supplemented by Commission Regulations for the implementation Two dimensions: A cross-sectional dimension A longitudinal dimension 24

25 EU-SILC - Characteristics Cross-sectional data First priority Multi-dimensional and linkable at micro-level Yearly data Coverage: income, labour, demography, housing, education, health Longitudinal data restricted to: Income, employment, limited set of non-monetary variables of deprivation Linkable at micro-level Yearly data 25

26 Priority 1: Timeliness Cross-sectional: Key validating tables (including structural indicators) with data collected in year N available on 10 January (N+2) Micro-data collected in year N available in March (N+2) Longitudinal: Data collected in year N available in July (N+2) EU-SILC - Priorities 26

27 EU-SILC - Priorities Priority 2: Comparability Input harmonisation = first priority Output harmonisation at micro-level is accepted Priority 3: Flexibility (integration into national statistical systems) Use of administrative registers in Nordic Countries Use of existing national surveys (HBS, national panels, multi-purpose survey, General Household Survey) Split of cross-sectional and longitudinal components in most countries but combination in some others (B, L, NL, P, FIN) 27

28 EU-SILC - Topics covered (2) INCOME (3) ACTIVITY AND WORK (1) SOCIAL EXCLUSION (4) HOUSING (5) DEMOGRAPHY, EDUCATION AND HEALTH 28

29 EU-SILC - Timetable December 2001: Approval of the Draft Framework Regulation by the Commission 2002: Discussion of the Framework Regulation by EP and Council Development of implementing Commission Regulations Pilot experiment in EU Member States 2003: Launch of EU-SILC in 10 EU-Member States (2004 for the others) 29

30 Harmonisation for EU - SILC Recommendations were applied Wide use of harmonised core variables Deviations limited to special requirements (e.g. household concept) Different procedures Output : if existing sources Target-structure oriented : where possible Input : if new survey / source Guidelines and standards for sample design Definition of minimum sample sizes Indicators for non-response and reporting standards 30

31 Potential use of CHINTEX results for European Social Surveys For ECHP improve conversion of national panels into ECHP format put forward suggestions for improving the quality of the ECHP UDB For EU-SILC evaluate feasibility of output harmonisation prepare MS to provide output harmonised micro-data provide input on imputation and weighting 31