Title
Community Innovation Survey 3
The focus of the Community Innovation Survey 3 (CIS 3) is the enterprise, conceptually referred to as the 'innovation dynamo' in the Oslo manual for innovation statistics. The CIS was designed to overcome seeing innovation as a linear model, whereby innovation follows on from the creative activity of invention. Instead, the data collected from this survey covers and embodies the diffusion of knowledge. Innovation is a complex process with many interacting components. The CIS3 questionnaire is broken down into 12 different sections:
1. Product innovation;
2. Process innovation;
3. Not yet completed or abandoned innovation activities;
4. Innovation activity and expenditure;
5. Intramural research and experimental development (R&D);
6. Effects of innovation;
7. Public funding of innovation;
8. Innovation co-operation;
9. Sources of information for innovation;
10. Hampered innovation activity;
11. Patents and other protection methods;
12. Other important strategical and organizational changes in the enterprise.
In order to ensure comparability across countries, Eurostat, in close cooperation with the EU Member States, developed a standard core questionnaire, with an accompanying set of definitions and methodological recommendations. Countries participated on the basis of gentleman's agreements and usually applied the harmonized concepts, definitions and methodological recommendations
Geographical Coverage
Most EU participating countries at that time, Norway and Iceland
Time Period Covered
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovators
Comparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
Country Specific Information: CIS 3
-
CZ - Czech Republic
Corresponding National Study
Technical Innovation in the Czech Republic
Producer
Czech Statistical Office
Universe
Enterprises with more than 10 employees and from the selected manufacturing and service (financial or not financial) sectors that according to their prevailing activity belong to the NACE Rev.1:
Mining and quarrying (10-14)
Manufacturing (15-37)
- 15-16 Food, beverages and tobacco
- 17-19 Textile and leather
- 20-22 Wood, pulp and printing
- 23-24 Coke and chemicals
- 25-26 Rubber and other non-metallic
- 27-28 Basic and fabricated metals
- 29 Machinery and equipment
- 30-33 Electrical and optical equipment
- 34-35 Transport equipment NEC
- 36-37 Manufacturing NEC and recycling
- 40-41 Electricity, gas and water supply
Services (51,60-67,72-73,74.2,74.3)
- 51 Wholesale trade
- 60-64 Transport, storage and communication
- 65-67 Financial intermediation
- 72 Computer and related activities
- 73 Research and development
- 74.2 Architectural and engineering activities
- 74.3 Technical testing and analysis
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
stratified sampling
Sampling Method
The data has been broken according to the NACE rev.1, regions and three size classes according to the number of employees. These size classes are: small enterprises with 10-49 employees, medium enterprises with 50-249 employees, large enterprises with more than 250 employees.
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
-
LV - Latvia
Corresponding National Study
Innovation survey (1999-2001)
Producer
Central Statistical Bureau (CSB)
Universe
no data
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
no data (however, combination of stratified sample with random sampling within strata and census was always used in other CIS waves in Latvia)
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Weighting: Method
no data
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
Central Statistical Bureau 2013. Innovation - Metadata. Available at: link.
-
LT - Lithuania
Corresponding National Study
Innovation activities of enterprises 1999-2001
Producer
Statistics Lithuania
Universe
The enterprise having at least 10 employees and from the following NACE Rev. 1.1 fields:
Mining and quarrying (Nace10-14) - except for NACE 12-13 (not provided)
Manufacturing (NACE 15-37) - except for NACE 30 (not provided)
Electricity, gas and water (NACE 40-41)
Wholesale trade (NACE 51)
Transport, storage and communication (NACE 60-64)
Financial Intermediation (NACE 65-67)
Computer and related activities (NACE 72)
Research and development (NACE 73)
Architectural and engineering activities (NACE 74.2)
Technical testing and analysis (NACE 74.3)
Source Of Sampling Frame
Business Register
Sampling Design
stratified sampling
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
Stratification of the sample:
- NACE codes: 10-14; 15-37; 40-41; 45; 51; 60-64; 65-67; 72; 73 (excluding research institutes); 74.2; 74.3
- 3 size classes: 10-49 employees (small) and 50-249 (medium-sized) and 250+ (large)
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
The weighting factor used for grossing up to population totals was number of enterprises for all variables.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
Statistics Lithuania 2005. CIS 3 The Community Innovation Survey Quality Report for Lithuania.
-
SK - Slovakia
Corresponding National Study
Statistical survey on innovations (INOV) 1999-2001
Producer
Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic
Universe
no data
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
Probability
- random
- not stratified
- one stage
Sampling Method
no data
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Weighting: Method
no data
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic 2013. Science, Technology and Innovation. Available at: link.
-
IS - Iceland
Corresponding National Study
Community Innovation Survey 1999-2001
Producer
The Icelandic Research Centre (RANNIS)
Universe
The target population in terms of economic activities are enterprises with 10 or more employees and from the following NACE divisions:
- C - Mining and quarrying
- D - Manufacturing
- E - Electricity, gas and water supply
- 51- Wholesale trade and commission trade
- I - Transport and communication
- J - Financial intermediation
- 72, 72, 74.2, 74.3 - Business services
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
complete census
- systematic samping within strata
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
- CATI
Weighting: Method
CIS 3 general: The weighting factors should have been based on the ratio between the number of enterprises or employees in the realised sample and the total number of enterprises or employees in each stratum of the frame population, after correction for enterprises that were no longer existing and for reclassification in terms of size or NACE (and after adjustment for non-response). In cases where a non-response analysis was carried out then the results of the non-response analysis were used in the calculation of weighting factors.
Resources
The results may vary from national publications, for example, due to different target populations (broader activity or enterprise size coverage) and/or different weighting factors or data processing procedures. This is particularly true for Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Austria, Sweden, Norway and Iceland.
European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.
-
RO - Romania
Corresponding National Study
The innovation in industry and services during 2000-2002
Producer
National Institute of Statistics
Universe
All legally registered active enterprises of more than 10 employees and over, performing activities ( according to NACE Rev.1.1) in the following areas:
- Mining and quarrying (NACE, Rev. 1 10-14)
- Manufacturing (NACE, Rev. 1 15-37)
- Electricity, gas and water supply (NACE, Rev. 1 40-41)
- Wholesale trade (NACE, Rev. 1 51)
- Transport and storage (NACE, Rev. 1 60-63)
- Posts and telecommunications (NACE, Rev. 1 64)
- Financial, banking and insurance activities (NACE, Rev. 1 65-67)
- Data processing and related activities (NACE, Rev. 1 72)
- Research & Development (NACE, Rev. 1 73)
- Design, urban, engineering and other technical services (NACE, Rev. 1 74.2)
- Testing activities and analyses (NACE, Rev. 1 74.3)
Source Of Sampling Frame
Official Business Register
Sampling Design
complete census
Sampling Method
Stratfication: NACE fields and three size classes: small enterprises with 10-49 employees, medium enterprises with 50-249 employees and large enterprises with 250 or more employees.
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2003
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
For the calculation of weights the number of enterprises was used.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
National Institute of Statistics 2005. CIS 3 The Community Innovation Survey Quality Report for Romania.
-
NO - Norway
Corresponding National Study
Innovation in the business enterprise sector 1999-2001
Producer
Statistics Norway
Universe
The target population in terms of economic activities are enterprises from the following NACE divisions:
- C - Mining and quarrying
- D - Manufacturing
- E - Electricity, gas and water supply
- 51- Wholesale trade and commission trade
- I - Transport and communication
- J - Financial intermediation
- 72, 72, 74.2, 74.3 - Business servicesCoverage is enterprises with at least 5 persons employed. Except in NACE groups F and H (41-43, 49-53) which only covers enterprises with at least 20 persons employed.
Source Of Sampling Frame
The Norwegian Central Register of Establishments and Enterprises (VoF)
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
The survey is a census of all units within the population with at least 50 persons employed. Among the other units with 5-49 persons employed a random sample is drawn within each stratum (NACE 2-digit and size class; 41 activities, 5 size classes).
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
CIS 3 general: The weighting factors should have been based on the ratio between the number of enterprises or employees in the realised sample and the total number of enterprises or employees in each stratum of the frame population, after correction for enterprises that were no longer existing and for reclassification in terms of size or NACE (and after adjustment for non-response). In cases where a non-response analysis was carried out then the results of the non-response analysis were used in the calculation of weighting factors.
Resources
The survey is carried out in counjuction with the business enterprise R&D survey.
The results may vary from national publications, for example, due to different target populations (broader activity or enterprise size coverage) and/or different weighting factors or data processing procedures. This is particularly true for Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Austria, Sweden, Norway and Iceland.
-
HU - Hungary
Corresponding National Study
Innovation survey 1999-2001
Producer
Hungarian Central Statistical Office
Universe
no data
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Method
no data
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Weighting: Method
no data
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
Eurostat 2014. Results of the second community innovation survey (CIS2) (inn_cis2) Reference Metadata in Euro SDMX Metadata Structure (ESMS). Available at: link.
-
PT - Portugal
Corresponding National Study
Innovation community survey - CIS 3
Producer
Statistics Portugal
Universe
The target population in terms of economic activities is enterprises with 10 or more employees and from the following NACE fields:
C - Mining and quarrying
D - Manufacturing
E - Electricity, gas and water supply
51- Wholesale trade and commission trade
I - Transport and communication
J - Financial intermediation
72, 72, 74.2, 74.3 - Business services
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
NACE and size as stratification variables; 42 activities, 3 size classes
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2001
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
CIS 3 general: The weighting factors should have been based on the ratio between the number of enterprises or employees in the realised sample and the total number of enterprises or employees in each stratum of the frame population, after correction for enterprises that were no longer existing and for reclassification in terms of size or NACE (and after adjustment for non-response). In cases where a non-response analysis was carried out then the results of the non-response analysis were used in the calculation of weighting factors.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.
-
BG - Bulgaria
Corresponding National Study
The statistical survey on innovation activity
Producer
National Statistical Institute
Universe
no data
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
complete census
Sampling Method
no data (however, census was used in the next CIS rounds in Bulgaria)
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2004
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
National Statistical Institute 2014. INNOVATION ACTIVITY - Main indicators for innovation activities of enterprises. Available at: link.
-
EL - Greece
Corresponding National Study
National innovation survey in Greek enterprises 1998-2000
Producer
National Statistical Service of Greece (currently Hellenic Statistical Authority - ELSTAT)
Universe
The target population in terms of economic activities are enterprises with 10 or more employees and from the following NACE divisions:
- C - Mining and quarrying
- D - Manufacturing
- E - Electricity, gas and water supply
- 51- Wholesale trade and commission trade
- I - Transport and communication
- J - Financial intermediation
- 72, 72, 74.2, 74.3 - Business services
Exception: in Greece no data was collected for NACE Division 73 and hence data for the aggregate of Divisions 72, 73 and Groups 74.2 and 74.3, as well as the services and business economy totals do not include this division.
Source Of Sampling Frame
no data
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
Data were stratified by NACE, size and region (20 activities, 3 size classes, 3 regions).
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2002
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- PAPI
Weighting: Method
CIS 3 general: The weighting factors should have been based on the ratio between the number of enterprises or employees in the realised sample and the total number of enterprises or employees in each stratum of the frame population, after correction for enterprises that were no longer existing and for reclassification in terms of size or NACE (and after adjustment for non-response). In cases where a non-response analysis was carried out then the results of the non-response analysis were used in the calculation of weighting factors.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.
-
ES - Spain
Corresponding National Study
Technological Innovation in Companies Survey. Year 2000 (Innovación tecnológica en las empresas 2000)
Producer
Instituto Nacional de Estadistica (Spanish Statistical Office)
Universe
This statistical research extends to all industrial enterprises, construction and services enterprises with at least ten employees, whose main economic activity corresponds to the industries of the NACE classes:
- Mining and quarrying (10-14)
- Manufacturing (15-37)
- Electricity, gas and water (40-41)
- Construction (45)
- Trade and Restaurants (50-55)
- Transport, storage and communication (60-64)
- Financial intermediation (65-67)
- Computer Services (72)
- Research and development (73)
- Other business services (70, 71 and 74)
- Utilities (85-99)
Source Of Sampling Frame
No data
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
The companies were stratified according to their size in terms of number of employees, their main branch of activity and their R&D. The population was consequently classified into 52 sectors per cluster of activities according to NACE-93 two or three digit code. These sectors are stratified according to the enterprise size measured by the number of paid employees:
- 10-49 employees
- 50-249 employees
- 250 and more employees
Stratified random sampling was applied with a purpose of affixation and estimation. The strata consisting of companies with more than 250 employees and the companies in the NACE 73 code strata were analyzed thoroughly.
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2001
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
- CATI
Weighting: Method
The weighting factors should have been based on the ratio between the number of enterprises or employees in the realised sample and the total number of enterprises or employees in each stratum of the frame population, after correction for enterprises that were no longer existing and for reclassification in terms of size or NACE (and after adjustment for non-response).
Resources
Exceptions to the reference year in CIS3: Spain used an earlier version of the CIS3 core questionnaire.
The results may vary from national publications, for example, due to different target populations (broader activity or enterprise size coverage) and/or different weighting factors or data processing procedures. This is particularly true for Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Austria, Sweden, Norway and Iceland.
-
BE - Belgium
Corresponding National Study
Third Community Innovation Survey in Belgium
Producer
Scientific and Technical Information Service (STIS)
Universe
All Belgian enterprises with an average of 10 or more employees in the period 1998-2000, excluding firms with a termination of activity, an early dissolution-liquidation, a merger with another company to form a third company, an absorption by another company, a closing or a liquidation, a scission into several companies, a dissolution by legal ending, an official approval of legal composition, bankruptcy, other incidents of insolvalbility. NACE groups covered (except for NACE Divisions 11 and 13):
C, D, E - Industry
C - Mining and quarrying
D - Manufacturing
E - Electricity, gas and water supply
51, I, J, 72, 73, 74.2, 74.3 - Services
51 - Wholesale trade and commission trade
I - Transport and communication
J - Financial intermediation
72, 73, 74.2, 74.3 - Business services (computer activities; R&D; engineering activities and consultancy; technical testing and analysis)
Source Of Sampling Frame
To build the population of Belgian enterprises three (other) sources were used: BEL-FIRST, OCAS (Office de controle de l'assurance) and ABB (Association des Banques Belges).
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
It started with a stratified population. Within each stratum a random sample or a census (100% coverage) was taken. Optimal allocation is used based on variance limitation for a specified number of enterprises that can be questionned (cost). The sampling fraction according to size and NACE are based on a grouping of the NACE classes in high/medium and low technology manufacturing/service firms for the different size classes. The grouping of the NACE-categories and the calculation of the sampling rates were based on CIS2 data (innovation percentages and unit response rate) and were calculated in order to reduce the variance within each of the strata as much as possible.
Strata criteria: NACE, size, region
Number of strata based on: 18 activities, 4 size classes, 3 regions
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Start Date
09-2001
End Date
11-2001
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
CIS 3 general: The weighting factors should have been based on the ratio between the number of enterprises or employees in the realised sample and the total number of enterprises or employees in each stratum of the frame population, after correction for enterprises that were no longer existing and for reclassification in terms of size or NACE (and after adjustment for non-response). In cases where a non-response analysis was carried out then the results of the non-response analysis were used in the calculation of weighting factors.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.
/nPeter Teirlinck and Benoit Vandervaeren 2003. Final report on the organisation and results of the Third Community Innovation Survey in Belgium.
-
DE - Germany
Corresponding National Study
3rd Community Innovation Survey
Producer
ZEW Centre for European Economic Research
Universe
Enterprises with 10 or more employees from NACE Rev. 1 divisions: 10-14, 15, 17-19, 20-22, 23-24, 25, 26, 27-28, 29, 30-32, 33, 34-35, 36-37, 40-41, 51, 60-63, 64, 65-67, 72, 73, 74.2-74.3.
Source Of Sampling Frame
ZEW data sources
Sampling Design
combination of stratified sampling and census
- random sampling within strata
Sampling Method
No official business register had been available in Germany up to 2003.
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
ended on September 14th 2001
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
To prepare the data for transmission to Eurostat, logical and consistency checks as well as imputation methods were carried out as implemented in the SAS routines supplied by Eurostat. As the procedure to correct for unit non-response was not included in the SAS routines provided, the bias correction which has been successfully implemented for several years now at the ZEW was used. Especially concerning the comparability of the weighted data over the years the method proved to yield reliable results.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
ZEW Centre for European Economic Research 2003. 3rd Community Innovation Surveys in Germany Final Report prepared for Eurostat.
/nEuropean Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.
-
EE - Estonia
Corresponding National Study
Innovative Activities in Enterprises in 1998–2000
Producer
The Statistical Office of Estonia
Universe
Enterprises with 10 or more employees of the following NACE Classes: 10-14, 15-37, 40-41, 51, 60-64, 65-67, 72, 73, 74.2, 74.3. Except for 12, 13 and 16 (no enterprises of those classes in Estonia).
Source Of Sampling Frame
Statistical Office register (an updated vesrion of the official Business Register)
Sampling Design
complete census
Sampling Method
Census. The correction of the sample was made for no longer existing enterprises and changes in size or NACE classes. It happened mainly for enterprises with 10–19 employees due to the fact that from 20 employees the quality of the register 99%, but for smaller ones it is lower.
Units Of Observation
- Enterprise
Date of Data Collection
2001
Type Of Data Source
Survey
Interview Mode
- Postal survey
Weighting: Method
The weighting factors (which were equal to 1 for census) were adjusted for non response for each stratum.
Resources
Comparability of CIS3 and CIS2 data: Comparability of data between the second and third Community Innovation Surveys is limited due to differences in survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and the definition of innovation. These differences concern:
- Lower cut-off for inclusion in the target population
- More industries included in the target population
- Changed definition of innovation
- Same core questionnaire used for manufacturing and services enterprises
- More information collected on both innovators and non-innovatorsComparability of CIS4 and CIS3 data: The comparability of data between the third and fourth Community Innovation Surveys was improved in comparison with previous surveys due to the fact that they used the same survey methodology, target population, survey questionnaires and definition of innovation. The CIS 4 questionnaire was shorter and considerably less difficult than the CIS 3 questionnaire. In most countries, CIS 4 was launched in 2005 for the reference period 2004 and an observation period running from 2002 to 2004, while for CIS3 countries used several observation periods. In order to gain additional information on the innovative capabilities of enterprises, CIS4 asked questions on organizational and marketing innovations and their effects.
Statistics Estonia 2005. CIS 3 The Community Innovation Survey, Quality Report for Estonia.