Draft Minutes of Second Meeting of the Scotstat Group for Agriculture
Date: 2.00pm, 25th May 2004
Location: Pentland House, Edinburgh
This document is also available in PDF format
Present
- Stuart Ashcroft
- Michael O'Neill
- Bruce Nelson
- Simon Gillam
- Morag Mitchell
- Ken Thompson
- Ralph Blainey
- Jonathan Davidson
Apologies for absence
Sheila Ward, Steven Thompson, Stewart Elder, Lisa Schneidau and Evan Williams
1. Minutes from previous meeting
These were approved and agreed as an accurate reflection of the meeting on 4 January 2004.
Feedback from Scotstat Main Board
Stuart Ashworth began by saying that he had received a letter from the Main Scotstat Board in March 2004 in which invited a discussion between the Scotstat Board and Committees on a range of issues. The aim of the discussion at this meeting was to form the group's collective response to the questions and to respond to the Scotstat Board in advance of its meeting in June
Question 1. Are there cross-cutting issues/activities which could be better considered by a range of Committees, and if so, how do we facilitate this?
Generally the Group felt that there was a sufficient range of cross-cutting issues currently in existence without the need to add to the list (although it was possible to identify further areas for consideration e.g. food topics and environmental statistics). The Group's view was that it would be better at this stage in the life of the Scotstat to improve links between committees to foster more co-ordinated discussion of major issues of common interest than to complicate matters by adding further to the list. It felt that there is no one specific means to encouraging dialogue over cross cutting issues. However, the Scotstat Board could simply invite Committees/Groups to consider and report back on one (or a small number of) issue(s). The approach should be tailored to fit the issue concerned; be that through the formation of a short-life cross cutting committee to deal with a specific issue, or more informal liaison between Scotstat subject committees with a common interest.
Question 2. Some committees have identified new opportunities for increasing data sharing among members of the committee, partly due to the improved mutual understanding of uses and demands, and partly due to trust. Are there wider opportunities to explore here, such as sharing within other committees, or even sharing between committees?
The Group thought that this was not a major issue, most of the statistics relevant to it are produced by SEERAD and that existing publication methods ensured that such information was widely disseminated, with individual approaches for data considered on a case-by-case basis against resource and other specified criteria. It was noted however, that the sharing of actual data amongst Group members might create an unfortunate "insider/outsider" situation among organisations not represented on Scotstat interest groups.
Question 3. There has been a suggestion that those who supply data to feed into the generation of statistics are not getting appropriate feedback. Is this something each committee could consider for their area, and recommend new procedures, if appropriate?
The Group was satisfied that processes are in place in relation to published statistics in the agricultural domain that give data providers sufficient feedback.
Question 4. One of the main aims of the new ScotStat arrangements was to encourage more non-Scottish Executive involvement in agenda setting, issue raising and paper writing etc. To what extent do committees feel there is further scope? The benefits of this can only really be realised if there is appropriate involvement of internal customers (e.g. policy) - so it would also be interesting to find out how committees are addressing the balance between internal and external involvement?
The Group felt that it was Scottish Executive led at the moment. Members are encouraged to contribute agenda items and provide papers for discussion at Group meetings. It saw merit in involving policy colleagues from within the Scottish Executive in discussions where issues are of particular relevance to policy design and delivery.
Stuart Ashworth agreed to reflect these views in a letter to the Main Scotstat Board.
2. Work Programme for 2004
Environmental Data issues
Ralph Blainey introduced a short briefing paper that set out the agricultural and agri-environmental data usage by SNH. The paper highlighted what information and data SNH produce, what data they obtain from others and the uses to which those data are put. The group's discussion focused on level of aggregation, matters of confidentiality and Freedom of information and value for money issues. The question of freedom of information and confidentiality were interlinked and discussed in some depth with there being questions on what proportion of certain support schemes had signed up to disclosure and how disclosure might be interpreted.
Jonathan Davidson noted that Census branch had a set of criteria currently in place to assist in deciding on disclosure of data and that these were consistent with the FOI, recognising the relationship with the Data Protection Act. He reported that the Scottish Executive is already considering whether it can widen access to data sets, and particularly in the light of increasing requests for a lower disaggregation of data or for data normally regarded as disclosive. The Execuitve is also considering how best to put data sets into the public domain and how confidentiality clauses might be adapted to allow as open access as possible to data sets whilst at the same time protecting the confidentiality of individuals. Ralph Blainey agreed to circulate a list of data sets collected by SNH.
Geographic Information Systems
Morag Mitchell presented a discussion paper on this subject which outlined a number of issues in relation to the use of Scottish Data sets when carrying out spatial analyses. The group discussed a range of issues from that relating to physical boundaries and the desirability of being able to nest areas spatially (and for such data to be available in a time series) to the availability of socio economic and environmental data (for which the Scottish Neighbourhood Statistic programme might be useful).
The group saw a need to take a view on data requirements over the next decade or so in relation to what might be usefully developed to assist in answering agricultural policy questions. [I did not note down who, if anyone, was to take this forward, did anybody volunteer?]
Accessibility to SEERAD statistics on the Scottish Executive Website
Ken Thompson introduced this paper which offered a general critique of the Scottish Executive's website and search engine, SEERAD's website and those pages specifically for agriculture. The discussion also focused on the ease in which data could be downloaded from the website, and whether tables might be in either Excel or PDF formats. Michael O'Neill noted the issues raised and said that general comments relating to the Scottish Executive's website and SEERAD's own web-pages had been passed on to those concerned with its design and administration. The Scotstat support team had also received a copy of Ken Thompson's comments and his concerns would be considered by Analytical Services Division when they put material on web-pages relevant to their work.
Review of Farm Incomes in Scotland .
Michael O'Neill introduced this item and explained that in preparation for publication of Farm Incomes in Scotland 2003-04, due to be published in 2005, SEERAD wished to receive feedback about the format and content of the publication in order to improve the user friendliness of the document. It was agreed that members of the group should supply any comments or suggestions on revising the booklet to Michael by the end of July 2004. He also noted that it was intended to publish the document in an electronic form only from 2005.
Michael also alerted the group of the intention to change the typology used to classify farms by type and size following the conclusions of a UK wide agriculture department working party on farm classification. The typological changes mainly involved the updating of the Standard Gross Margin (SGM) co-efficients from a 3 year 1988 centred average to a five year 2000 centre average for use in Farm Accounts Survey and Census publications from 2004. The changes in relation to farm size arose from the working party's decision to use Standard Labour Requirement (SLR) co-efficients in place of European Size Units (ESUs) as the yardstick for classifying farms by size. Both of these changes referred only to UK publications and not to European publications where 3 year 2000 centred SGMs and ESUs would be used to classify farms by type and size respectively. Should any member of the group wish to have a copy of the UK working group's report then a copy could be made available to them from SEERAD.
Farm Outlook Survey
Michael O'Neill informed the group that following an internal review of Net Farm Income (NFI) forecasting, for the 2003-04 Farm Accounts year, SEERAD were piloting this intentions based survey in order to assist it in producing NFI forecasts, with the possibility of producing a forecast range of farm incomes by type, rather than the single point as at present. He asked the group for any comments on the proposed survey as soon as possible given the need for SEERAD to pass the form onto the Scottish Agricultural College who would be including this survey as part of the 2003-04 Farm Accounts Survey.
Any Other Business
There was a short discussion on benchmarking activity which the group might consider being worth while undertaking, Group members identified a number of streams of work already in place, such as Milk bench, the Red Meat Industry Forum, SEERAD's Whole Farm Review Scheme Pilot. Ralph Blainey noted SNH's interest in environmental benchmarking and Morag Mitchell reminded the group about the Scottish Agricultural College's farm diversification database. Stuart Ashworth and Michael O'Neill agreed to consider what else might usefully be done in respect of benchmarking in Scotland.
Simon Gillam offered, in the light of the Forestry Commission joining the group, to produce a short paper on Forestry Statistics for the next meeting.
Next Meeting
Date, time and place to be agreed.
Scottish Executive.
November 2004.