60 likes | 182 Views
This paper discusses Statistics Finland's strategy for implementing web-based data collection methods by 2007. Respondents have the choice to use web options based on their judgment of data security. As of May 2005, a significant increase in web-based collections is anticipated, with expectations to rise from 15 to 45 surveys by 2006. The paper explores experiences and questions surrounding data protection, the inclusion of past data, and the balance between in-house and contracted approaches in enhancing data collection efficiency.
E N D
Internet Data Reporting CES 13.6.2005 Using the Web in Collecting Data for Business Statistics in Finland
Statistics Finland’s strategy • To offer a WEB based option in all data collections by 2007 • Its is the respondent’s choice whether to use WEB or not ---> it is his / her judgement what is sufficient in data security Ilkka Hyppönen
about 45 surveys (excluding collections with less than 30 respondents) Our approach is pragmatic WEB -collection in use 1.5.2005: 15 by the end of year 2006: 45 The paper option remains for the foreseeable future--> decreases benefits Business data collections (excl. financial stats) Ilkka Hyppönen
Mr Fellegis questions • What approach to use to protect the data from interception in both directions? Experiences?--> Not a very big concern. -- data is not super sensitive -- the respondents decide whether to use or not -- no experiences • Experiences with provision of past data? --> ?? Past data is included in the response data base and is available to the respondent Ilkka Hyppönen
Mr Fellegis questions • Any unreported experiences with respondent research? --> not in this area (WEB) • Should we create an ad hoc working group on EDR? Does not seem necessary from our point of view; possible solutions in various countries are tied with the institutional conditions Ilkka Hyppönen
Mr Fellegis questions • Why have you adopted both an in-house and a contracted approach? When do you use each?--> in 1997 we did not have in-house expertise --> with limited in-house resources progress would be slow --> with both in-house / contracted we can “double” the speed • Which one works better? --> Both seem to be doing all right. --> For short term --> in-house because must have fast response --> can not wait for a service provider to react Ilkka Hyppönen