Registry Detail

1549

Information

28 May 2002

ISIC 4 questionnaire - Summary of responses A5

A. Conceptual and structural issues 5. The application of the classification requires that certain rules be followed to classify observed units correctly. Certain rules deal with the classification of units engaged in multiple economic activities. Should the rules regarding the classification of units engaged in vertically integrated activities and other types of combined activities be changed? What about the rules for top down coding? Or the use of value added to determine which activities will determine the code for a unit engaged in multiple activities?

1. Use of Top down method to decide principal activity Of 34 replies 18 were in favour of the top-down , with only two (including USA) against. 14 had No opinion/unclear Conclusion: The present treatment in ISIC should be retained 2. Use of Value added when deciding principal activity The answers were Yes 5, Yes with substitutes with ranking 4, Yes with substitutes without ranking 15, No 4 and No opinion/unclear 7 Most admitted that in real life information on value added often did not exist, but believed that value added should continue to be used as conceptual reference Conclusion: The present treatment in ISIC should be retained 3. Rules for classifying vertically integrated units Out of 34, 7 preferred the present situation (final product with certain exceptions), 5 were in favour more exceptions but with of elaboration of a detailed guide, 9 preferred Value added and only 2 always final product with 12 Unclear/ no opinion Conclusion: No clear guidance, but only an indication that that the present rule is too restrictive