Registry Detail

1921

Information

24 November 2003

2003 quest. - Summary of question 29 responses

Question 29 from the "questions" document: Do you have a preference for any of the coding systems presented in the paper or any others? -see sections 1-4 of the paper

Summary of responses to question 29 (General coding system) Overall replies: Double-alpha with 4-digit numeric system 36 replies Alphanumeric system 7 replies * Numeric system only 8 replies Other 3 replies * - the Afristat reply (18 countries) is counted as one The majority of the respondents favoured a system similar to the current NACE system (suggested by all EU countries). I assume, that this covers the presented structure and the top-top level for this type of coding, although in this case the NACE coding system is still different (in terms of levels for double-alpha coding) from the ISIC proposal. The replies favouring an alphanumeric system, without mentioning the double-alpha option, typically referred to the structure presented, without taking into account the top-top level. Some of the replies in favour of the all-numerical option also mentioned the 22 categories at the top level, implying that a 2-digit code would already be needed here. The other replies did not suggest a particular coding system. In addition, some replies stated that: - gaps should be built into the coding system to allow for country adaptation (3 replies) - the length of the code should not increase (3 replies) - Roman numerals could be used for the top-top level (2 replies) - the codes should be different from the previous ISIC version to avoid confusion (2 replies), in contrast to the continuity requested by others - this question should be reviewed when the final structure is known (3 replies) Action suggested: - Review this question when full structure is known