Metadata for Official Statistics

Expand / Collapse

Use the - and -icon left of the headlines to open and close the different sections of the content area.

The - and -icon open / close all sections at once.

x

Tooltips

Explanatory notes are shown when the mouse cursor is moved over the field headlines.

x

myMetadataBox

The myMetadata Box collects variables which can be used in the functions of the work with myMetadata section.

Add variables
via drag & drop into the box in the top right corner or by clicking the -icon which appears when you hover over the variables name or headline.

Add variable lists
On pages displaying variable lists you can add complete lists of variables as well by using the -icon which is placed next to the headline.

Remove a selected variable
with the -icon which appears on the right when hovering the variable in the list.

x

Study: CIS 3

Titles

Title Community Innovation Survey 3

Abstract

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

Coverage

Geographical Coverage

Most EU participating countries at that time, Norway and Iceland

Time Period Covered

Notes

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.

References

European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

_x005F_x000D_/n

Eurostat 2014. Results of the second community innovation survey (CIS2) (inn_cis2) Reference Metadata in Euro SDMX Metadata Structure (ESMS). Available at: link.

Country Specific Information: CIS 3

  • CZ - Czech Republic

    National Reference

    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

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 5800
    Achieved Sample Size 3808

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Weighting

    Notes

    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.

    References

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

    /n

    CZSO 2003. Technical Innovation in the Czech Republic in 1999-2001. Available at: link.

  • LV - Latvia

    National Reference

    Corresponding National Study

    Innovation survey (1999-2001)

    Producer

    Central Statistical Bureau (CSB)

    Universe

    no data

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 1993 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Weighting

    Weighting: Method

    no data

    Notes

    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.

    References

    Central Statistical Bureau 2013. Innovation - Metadata. Available at: link.

  • LT - Lithuania

    National Reference

    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)

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 2858
    Achieved Sample Size 1954

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    Weighting: Method

    The weighting factor used for grossing up to population totals was number of enterprises for all variables.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    Statistics Lithuania 2005. CIS 3 The Community Innovation Survey Quality Report for Lithuania.

  • SK - Slovakia

    National Reference

    Corresponding National Study

    Statistical survey on innovations (INOV) 1999-2001

    Producer

    Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic

    Universe

    no data

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 1734 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    Source Of Sampling Frame

    no data

    Sampling Design

    • Probability
    • random
    • not stratified
    • one stage

    Sampling Method

    no data

    Units

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Weighting

    Weighting: Method

    no data

    Notes

    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.

    References

    Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic 2013. Science, Technology and Innovation. Available at: link.

  • IS - Iceland

    National Reference

    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

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 680 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    Source Of Sampling Frame

    no data

    Sampling Design

    • complete census
    • systematic samping within strata

    Units

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey
    • CATI

    Weighting

    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.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

  • RO - Romania

    National Reference

    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)

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 9421
    Achieved Sample Size 7844

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2003

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    Weighting: Method

    For the calculation of weights the number of enterprises was used.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    National Institute of Statistics 2005. CIS 3 The Community Innovation Survey Quality Report for Romania.

  • NO - Norway

    National Reference

    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 services 

    Coverage 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.

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 3548 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    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.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    Statistics Norway 2003. Innovation in the business enterprise sector2001. Available at: link.

    /n

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

  • HU - Hungary

    National Reference

    Corresponding National Study

    Innovation survey 1999-2001

    Producer

    Hungarian Central Statistical Office

    Universe

    no data

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 951 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    Source Of Sampling Frame

    no data

    Sampling Design

    Sampling Method

    no data

    Units

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Weighting

    Weighting: Method

    no data

    Notes

    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.

    References

    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

    National Reference

    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

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 1804 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2001

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    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.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

  • BG - Bulgaria

    National Reference

    Corresponding National Study

    The statistical survey on innovation activity

    Producer

    National Statistical Institute

    Universe

    no data

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 10279 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2004

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    Notes

    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.

    References

    National Statistical Institute 2014. INNOVATION ACTIVITY - Main indicators for innovation activities of enterprises. Available at: link.

  • GR - Greece

    National Reference

    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.

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size no data
    Achieved Sample Size 1543 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2002

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • PAPI

    Weighting

    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.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

  • ES - Spain

    National Reference

    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)

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 16000
    Achieved Sample Size 8024 (dataset)

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2001

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey
    • CATI

    Weighting

    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).

    Notes

    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.

    References

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

    /n

    Instituto Nacional de Estadistica. Metodología Innovación Tecnológica 2000. Available at: link.

  • BE - Belgium

    National Reference

    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)

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 4482
    Achieved Sample Size 1273

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Start Date

    09-2001

    End Date

    11-2001

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    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.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

    /n

    Peter Teirlinck and Benoit Vandervaeren 2003. Final report on the organisation and results of the Third Community Innovation Survey in Belgium.

  • DE - Germany

    National Reference

    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.

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 13642
    Achieved Sample Size 2929

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    ended on September 14th 2001

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    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.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    ZEW Centre for European Economic Research 2003. 3rd Community Innovation Surveys in Germany Final Report prepared for Eurostat.

    /n

    European Communities 2004. Innovation in Europe Results for the EU, Iceland and Norway Data 1998–2001. Available at: link.

  • EE - Estonia

    National Reference

    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).

    Target Sample Size

    Cross-sectional Data
    Sampling Units Enterprise
    Actual Sample Size 3490
    Achieved Sample Size 2594

    Sampling Procedure

    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

    • Enterprise

    Data Collection

    Date of Data Collection

    2001

    Type Of Data Source

    Survey

    Interview Mode

    • Postal survey

    Weighting

    Weighting: Method

    The weighting factors (which were equal to 1 for census) were adjusted for non response for each stratum.

    Notes

    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.

    References

    Statistics Estonia 2005. CIS 3 The Community Innovation Survey, Quality  Report for Estonia.