1 / 21

Progress Report on Development of SDMX-based BOP DSD

This report outlines the progress made in the development of the SDMX-based Balance of Payments Data Structure Definition (BOP DSD) for the BPM6. It includes updates on the governance structure, content review, and pilot phase implementation.

lorrainerodriguez
Download Presentation

Progress Report on Development of SDMX-based BOP DSD

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Progress report on development of SDMX-based BOP DSDbyBernadette LauroECB/S/ETS Balance of Payments Working Group Luxembourg, 27 November 2012

  2. Outline Why SDMX for BPM6 Governance structure Content review of BOP DSD (newData Structure Definition) The SDMX-based data model Finalisation of pilot phase I Disposition log – issues for clarification/feedback Roadmap for adopting BOP-DSD Milestone 4 (implementation) and next steps

  3. Progress report – Why SDMX for BPM6 • SDMX (Statistics Data and Metadata Exchange) is an initiative to foster standards for the exchange of statistical information • Scope: increase timeliness in data exchange and efficiency • Sponsored by BIS, ECB, Eurostat, IMF, OECD, WB, UN • Priority areas for an SDMX-DSD: SNA and BOP

  4. Progress report – Governance structure for the BOP-DSD

  5. Progress report – Content review of BOP DSD V01 • Pilot test launched in June 2012 – 27 countries involved • Purpose of the pilot: codes review/mapping internal data processing/highlight issues; mainly database management-oriented • Disposition log to summarise actions that will be undertaken • Separate FDI DSD, with 16 dimensions, o.w. some common dimensions shared with BOP DSD

  6. Progress report – The SDMX-based data model (dimensions) V0.1 Basic info Non- financial account excl. Investment income Financial account +investment income Complementary info

  7. Progress report – The SDMX-based data model V0.1 (attributes) M= Mandatory O= Optional.

  8. ..more attributes needed for data dissemination (to be agreed)

  9. Finalisation of pilot phase I • October 2012: 122 comments processed via disposition log file – overall positive feedback • Actions triggered by disposition “accepted”: • Addition/Deletion of codes • Change in descriptors and validation rules • Address best solutions • Actions triggered by disposition ”for clarification”: • Review of cross-domain lists by NA DSD SG and SDMX SWG (REF_AREA, REF_SECTOR, CL_CURRENCY, CL_FREQ) • Treatment of “fiscal year”

  10. Benefits BOP DSD and SDMX • Uses SDMX hierarchical code lists to create relationships between codes • Address validation rules

  11. Disposition log – issues for clarification (1) • (ID 20) ACCOUNTING ENTRY: Mnemonic codes Specific for reserve assets

  12. Disposition log – issues for clarification (2) • (ID 22) National vs community concept (i.e. BOP vs ST1 data): use of different data set identifiers (DSIs) • (ID 46) ECB Guideline’s requirements will be provided in BOP DSD format with example codification • (ID 105) Banknote denomination dimension for future reporting of euro banknote shipment with separate DSD

  13. Disposition log – Issues for clarification (3) • (ID 89) Other changes in volume = KA • Possible transmission of data not required in ECB/2011/23

  14. Feedback received on practical issues (1) • Cross-domain issues: • View on fixed versus variable codes in your collection/compilation/transmission system: • The variable code length is not a problem for countries, however the maximum length of codes must be defined and remain stable;

  15. Feedback received on practical issues (2) • (ID 16) PUBLICATION STATUS – attached at the series, not at the observations level. Go back. • Set by the provider • Conditional (voluntary): provider needs to flag if they want the receiver not to publish • Allows receiver to manage secondary confidentiality • Easier for the provider to monitor the publication of a series than of an observation

  16. Feedback required on practical issues (2) • Confidentiality of the observation conditional to status of the series • the series is flagged as non-publishable: • then no observations can be free • Priority over OBS_CONF • the series is flagged as publishable: • then, if some observations are not to be published, they should be flagged through the confidentiality attribute • This means that the proposed code “Under embargo” is redundant:

  17. Next Steps • Finalisation BOP DSD V0.1 by early December 2012 • Launch pilot phase II with Sandbox in December 2012 • Beta version of the Sandbox to provide registry, database, user-interface to submit datafile • Development of final version BOP DSD V0.2 by end-December.

  18. Next Steps (cont’d) • Workshop WG ETS on practical issues (Feb2012) • WG SIM members invited to participate/contribute to the data exchange session • Written communication with BOP domain groups on BOP DSD V0.2 and associated reporting arrangements (Jan-March 2013) • In parallel, SDMX review of cross-domain codelists • BOPCOM to approve BOP DSD V0.3 in Spring 2013

  19. Roadmap for adopting BOP-DSD 24 Jan June2013 Jan Q2 Q3 2014 2010 12 13 11 1. PREPARATION 2. DEVELOPMENT 3. CONSULTATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE 4. IMPLEMENTATION Pilot phase I BOP DSD V01 5. PRODUCTION AND MAINTENANCE Start regular data exchange Pilot phase II BOP DSD V02 Final BOP DSD

  20. Milestone 4 – Implementation go back 2013Q3 Adaptation of the production systems Spring 2013 2012Q2 Dec Jan13 Nov Pilot projects Release (SDMX registry) FINALISATION BOP DSD V01 BOP DSD V02 PILOT TEST 2 (Sandbox) DETAILED IDENTIFICATION OF REPORTING ARRANGEMENTS, DATA FLOWS, CONSTRAINTS BOP DSD V03 Feb 2012: WG ETS WORKSHOP on practical issues on DSD codification and data exchange – for participation of WG SIM members as well! Review by SDMX SWG of cross-domain codelists

  21. Thank you for your attention Please provide feedback to: Bernadette.lauro@ecb.europa.eu BOP_IIP_Stats@ecb.europa.eu The views expressed in this presentation are exclusively those of the author

More Related