Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the European Statistics Code of Practice and coordination within the European Statistical System

The European Statistics Code of Practice was endorsed by the Statistical Programme Committee in 2005, and amended in 2011 by the European Statistical System Committee (ESSC) following the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on European statistics.

A self-assessment against the Principles of the Code was launched in 2005. This was followed in 2006-2008 by peer reviews across the Member States, European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries and Eurostat. These reviews assessed the institutional environment and dissemination practices of statistical institutes. The 2008 Commission report to the European Parliament and the Council concluded that "full compliance with the Code remains a challenge for basically all statistical institutes and Eurostat" despite there being "overall high compliance levels complemented by dynamic progress with regard to improvements". The report envisaged another round of peer reviews "within the next five years subject to advice by the European Statistical Governance Advisory Board in particular on the scope and considering costs and benefits".

Consequently, a new round of peer reviews was launched in the 28 Member States, the four EFTA countries and Eurostat at the end of 2013. Their aim was primarily to improve the efficiency and credibility of the European Statistical System (ESS), to increase its capacity to produce European statistics, to reassure stakeholders of both the quality of European statistics and the trustworthiness of the ESS, and to give producers of statistics an inside view on the progress made to date.

This round of peer reviews differed in many respects from the previous one. Firstly, all 15 Principles of the Code and the coordinating role of the National Statistical Institutes (NSIs) within their statistical systems were subject to an audit-like review. Secondly, the reviews focused on issues where further progress was needed. Thirdly, in addition to the NSIs, a number of other national authorities (ONAs) responsible for producing European statistics were assessed, although not to the same extent as the NSIs themselves. Fourthly, evaluations were conducted by independent peer reviewers, with Eurostat being reviewed by the European Statistical Governance Advisory Board. The reports present the peer reviewers’ views and findings and make recommendations for action. The countries concerned and Eurostat responded to these recommendations, designing improvement actions to be implemented accordingly.

• Primary Source