1. LAMAS Working Group 24-25 June 2014
Agenda Item 2.7 Monthly unemployment

2. INCREASED VISIBILITY, HENCE INCREASED QUALITY REQUIREMENTS
Context
MUR now PEEI and MIP indicator
One of the most visible of Eurostat's indicators
INCREASED VISIBILITY, HENCE INCREASED QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

3. History Situation up to 2008 MUR managed by Eurostat for nearly all MS
Ad-hoc treatment for each MS
For several MS: quarterly data only
Improvements since 2008
Monthly data for all but 1 country
MU data directly produced by15 MS
One single method (Denton) applied by Eurostat for all other countries

4. Drawbacks of the current situation
No legal guarantee of monthly data transmission (content, deadlines, methods, quality)
Heterogeneous MS' choices (harmful for comparability and quality of EA/EU aggregates)
Several estimation methods for raw data
Different choices for adjustment (SA vs. trends)
Different timeliness

5. Strategy for further MU improvement
Legal framework (long-term)
Quality framework (mid-term)
Transitional arrangements (short-term)

6. 1. Legal framework (long term)
General provisions to be submitted to the next DSS meeting …
…. in the context of the modernisation of social statistics
… to be detailed through a delegated act in 2015

7. 2. Quality framework (mid-term)
Goal:
Establish statistical criteria…
… to assess performance of different methodological options…
… and rank acceptable methods / identify non- acceptable ones
How: TF on monthly unemployment

8. TF on monthly unemployment: tasks 1/2
Identify relevant quality dimensions/concerns
Volatility, Revisions, Turning point identification, Timeliness, …
Also based on preliminary user consultation
Develop indicators for each dimension
Starting from work already carried out by Eurostat

9. TF on monthly unemployment: tasks 2/2
Define acceptance/rejection thresholds for each indicator
Provide indications on how to read indicators
scoreboard vs synthetic indicator(s)
Ultimately propose a A/B/C classification of methods

10. TF: organisation and LAMAS support
2 meetings: Q (22-23 October) and first half 2015
Report to LAMAS: possibly in June 2015
LAMAS expected to provide all necessary support
User consultation before first meeting
Key international and national users
Eurostat develops a short questionnaire to submit to users
NSIs asked to provide references to national users and possibly submit the questionnaire to them

11. 3. Indications for the immediate future
Goal: provide immediate, transitory guidance
Indications (before TF conclusions):
No trends as the headline
No 3mma, except if an estimation method is found for the “missing” month(s)
No non-centred moving averages
Recommendation: ask Eurostat before taking initiative!

12. Training on regression composite estimation
Theoretical aspects + supervised application directly by participants (detailed programme will follow in due course)
Held in Luxembourg in December 2014 (4/5 or 8/9)
Trainer from Istat (Mrs Silvia Loriga)
Max 15 places
Reimbursement of travel expenses for participants
The same course or similar ones could be organised next year

13. Exchange of views (25 replies)
Unanimous support to the creation of a TF on MU
7 or 8 volunteers so far: DE, FR, IT, PT, RO, (FI), SE, UK
Explicit support to user survey from IE, IT, CY, LV and PT (but no objection by any MS)
6 volunteers for training: EE, FR, LV, LU, AT, PT

14. LAMAS is asked to:
Approve the creation of a TF on monthly unemployment and the proposed mandate
Approve the idea of running a preliminary user survey
Volunteer for the TF
Endorse the indications for the immediate future
Volunteer to participate to the training on regression composite estimation