ICT Sector Definition Transition From NACE Rev. 1.1 To .
ICT Sector DefinitionTransition from NACE Rev. 1.1to NACE Rev. 2A Methodological NoteAuthors: Matilde Mas, Juan Carlos Robledo,Juan Pérez (Ivie)Editors: Juraj Stančík, Geomina Turlea,Paul Desruelle2012Report EUR 25690 EN
European CommissionJoint Research CentreInstitute for Prospective Technological StudiesContact informationAddress: Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3. E-41092 Seville (Spain)E-mail: jrc-ipts-secretariat@ec.europa.euTel.: 34 954488318Fax: 34 c.ec.europa.euThis publication is a Technical Report by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.Legal NoticeNeither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commissionis responsible for the use which might be made of this publication.Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European UnionFreephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.It can be accessed through the Europa server http://europa.eu/.JRC77364EUR 25690 ENISBN 978-92-79-28089-4 (pdf)ISSN 1831-9424 (online)doi:10.2791/40232Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012 European Union, 2012Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.Printed in Spain
AcknowledgmentsThe analysis reported in this methodological note was produced under the project ICTR&D Macrodata Collection and Analysis (IPTS-2012-J04-002-NC) by the InformationSociety Unit of JRC-IPTS1 and the Valencian Institute of Economic Research (InstitutoValenciano de Investigaciones Económicas - Ivie). This work is part of the EuropeanCommission project “Prospective Insights on R&D in ICT” (PREDICT2) jointly funded byDG Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CNECT) and JRC-IPTS.The authors wish to thank Vincenzo Spiezia (International Labour Office, ILO) andAndrea de Panizza (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD)for their helpful comments that have contributed to important improvements to theinitial version of this report. Support from Eva Benages and Laura Hernández in theconstruction of the non EU-27 database is also acknowledged. Finally, thoroughchecking and editing of the text by Patricia Farrer is gratefully acknowledged.12JRC-IPTS is one of the seven research institutes of the European Commission’s Joint ResearchCentre.For further information see the PREDICT webpage: http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/ISG/PREDICT.html1
TABLE OF CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION.52. FROM NACE REV. 1.1 TO NACE REV. 2.73. ITALY AS AN EXAMPLE. 114. TOWARDS A FEASIBLE COMMON ICT SECTOR DEFINITION. 155. IMPLICATIONS. 176. CONCLUDING REMARKS . 25REFERENCES . 27LIST OF TABLESTable 1:Table 2:Table 3:Table 4:Table 5:Table 6:Table 7:The 2007 OECD ICT sector definition . 8Correspondences between NACE Rev. 2 and NACE Rev 1.1. 92007 NACE Rev. 2 ICT data for GVA and employment. Italy . 122008 linking coefficient for GVA and employment. Italy. 132007 NACE Rev. 2 ICT data for GVA and employment. Italy . 14Feasible ICT sector disaggregation. 2006-2009. 15Feasible ICT sector disaggregation. GVA and employment. 2007-2008,Italy and Germany . 16LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1:Figure 2:Figure 3:Figure 4:Figure 5:Figure 6:Figure 7:Figure 8:Share of ICT sector. European Union 27. 2008 (percentages). 18ICT sector labour productivity. European Union 27. 2008, (thousand euros PPS perperson). 19ICT BERD intensity. European Union 27. 2008, (percentage). 20Share of ICT sector. 2008 (percentages). 21ICT sector labour productivity. 2008. (thousand euros PPS per person) . 23ICT BERD intensity. 2008.* (percentages). 23Sectoral composition of ICT GVA. 2008 (percentages). 24Sectoral composition of ICT GVA. 2008, (percentages). 243
1.INTRODUCTIONR&D has been traditionally identified as one of the main drivers of productivitygrowth. Since the mid 1990s, new Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)producing sectors were put at the forefront of the explanation of the different pathsfollowed by the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) as regardsproductivity growth during the expansion years 1995-2007. ICTs provide essentialinfrastructures and tools for knowledge creation, sharing and diffusion, and boost theinnovation capacity of all sectors. Stimulating creative activities in the area of ICT hastherefore a double effect on the economy: first, through the growth of the sectoritself and second, through the stimulation of R&D and innovation in other sectors ofthe economy.From an analytical, and also political, point of view, it has become fundamental toempirically test the impact that R&D expenditures in the ICT producing sectors haveon economic growth. To do this, we need a common definition of the ICT sector thatwill allow us to establish comparisons between countries at a given moment in timein order to carry out cross country analyses. At the same time, we need an ICTdefinition that holds constant during a period of time so that we can analyze theperformance of a country, or set of countries, as time elapses. That is, we also need acommon ICT definition in order to analyze the performance over time.In recent years, we have witnessed two fundamental and closely linked changes thataffect our understanding of the role played by the ICT sector, and by the R&Dexpenditures that it undertakes. The first refers to the change in the classification ofeconomic activities from the previous NACE3 Rev. 1.1 to NACE Rev. 2, implemented in2008. NACE Rev. 1.1 had 17 sections and 62 divisions; NACE Rev. 2 has 21 sectionsand 88 divisions. At the highest level of NACE, some sections can be easily comparedwith the previous version of the classification. However, the introduction of some newconcepts at the section level, e.g. the information section or the grouping of activitieslinked to environment, makes a straightforward comparison between NACE Rev. 2 andits previous version very difficult.The second change —at least partially led by the first one— was a new definition forthe ICT sector. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development)had proposed in 2002 a precise definition, accompanied by an operational definitionin view of the difficulties faced from a statistical standpoint. With the change in NACEclassification, together with the improvements in our understanding of ICTcharacteristics, a new definition for what should be considered as ICT was proposedby the OECD in 2007.The two changes just mentioned —new NACE and new ICT definition—represent animprovement in the statistical tools available, but also have the drawbacks thatusually accompany all methodological changes. The first inconvenience is that thetime series is broken, making it difficult to diagnose improvements/deteriorationprecisely over time. The second is that it is difficult to establish the different rhythm3NACE stands for Nomenclature statistique des activités économiques dans la Communautéeuropéenne (Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community).5
followed by countries when the information has to be adjusted to the newrequirements. In other words, the changes not only make it difficult to keep track ofdata across time, but also impede the comparison of information across countries ata given moment in time.The analysis reported in this methodological note was produced under the project ICTR&D Macrodata Collection and Analysis (IPTS-2012-J04-002-NC) between theInformation Society Unit of JRC-IPTS4 and the Valencian Institute of EconomicResearch (Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas - Ivie). This work is partof the European Commission project: “Prospective Insights on R&D in ICT” (PREDICT5)jointly funded by DG Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DGCONNECT) and JRC-IPTS.Our goal was to obtain a homogenous series for years 2006 to 2009 of a set ofvariables —mainly Gross Value Added (GVA), employment, and Business R&D(BERD)— for the ICT sector according to the new definition suggested by the OECD in2007 and making use of the new NACE Rev. 2 classification. In order to achieve thisgoal, we start in Section 2 by establishing the correspondence between the two ICTsector definitions and the two classifications at hand, as well as a methodology fortransition from NACE Rev. 1.1 to NACE Rev. 2. We will then present, in Section 3, theresults for Italy, which has been taken as an example due to the detailed informationit provides. Since the majority of countries cannot provide such detailed information, acompromise is offered as a solution in Section 4. Finally, Section 5 illustrates some ofthe differences emerging from the methodological changes just sketched and Section6 presents some concluding remarks.45JRC-IPTS is one of the seven research institutes of the European Commission’s Joint ResearchCentre.For further information see the PREDICT webpage: http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/ISG/PREDICT.html6
2.FROM NACE REV. 1.1 TO NACE REV. 2The objective of this section is to present the methodology that has been used toreclassify NACE Rev. 1.1 data for ICT R&D over the 2006-2007 period according toNACE Rev. 2 classification, taking into account the 2007 OECD ICT sector definitionwhich appears in Table 1. In order to facilitate the transition towards the new OECDICT sector definition, the Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas(Valencian Institute of Economic Research, Ivie) has elaborated correspondence tables,see Table 2. These tables are the first step towards obtaining the links between thetwo NACE versions.In practice, it is difficult to provide an ICT database on the basis of a fullycomprehensive correspondence between NACE Rev. 2 and NACE Rev 1.1 (Table 2) forseveral reasons. First, the elaboration of a one-to-one correspondence requires thehighest level of disaggregation (or the most detailed level of classification) foreconomic activities, i.e. four-digit or class level. However, there are no publicationsthat cover all the activities involved for each variable and country at this level ofdetail. Secondly, a one-to-one relationship between both NACE codes is not available.NACE Rev. 1.1 (ISIC Rev. 3) codes are often linked with more than one NACE Rev. 2(ISIC Rev. 4) code. For example, 323 NACE Rev. 1.1 is linked with 261, 263 and 264NACE Rev. 2 codes; 261 NACE Rev. 2 is linked with only one part of 311, 312, 313,321 and 323 NACE Rev. 1.1 codes. Thus, it is not possible to obtain full codes of NACEREV 1.1 even when aggregating all ICT manufacturing; trade; or services sectors. Forthese reasons, we need to use approximate correspondences.7
Table 1: The 2007 OECD ICT sector definition(based on NACE Rev. 2)ICT manufacturing industries261262263264268Manufacture of electronic components and boardsManufacture of computers and peripheral equipmentManufacture of communication equipmentManufacture of consumer electronicsManufacture of magnetic and optical mediaICT trade industries46514652Wholesale of computers, computer peripheral equipment and softwareWholesale of electronic and telecommunications equipment and partsICT services 31295119512Software publishingWired telecommunications activitiesWireless telecommunications activitiesSatellite telecommunications activitiesOther telecommunications activitiesComputer programming activitiesComputer consultancy activitiesComputer facilities management activitiesOther information technology and computer service activitiesData processing, hosting and related activitiesWeb portalsRepair of computers and peripheral equipmentRepair of communication equipmentSource: OECD (2011).Table 2 provides both correspondences —comprehensive and approximate— based onthe 2007 OECD ICT sector definition. In our opinion, the best solution for backcastingestimations is the allocation of full NACE Rev. 1.1 codes that better define each ICTsub-sector. The approximate correspondence facilitates the estimation of NACE Rev. 2ICT sector series for the NACE Rev. 1.1 period (see MOSPI 2010).The only year for which national statistical offices provide both versions of NACE datafor all variables is 2008. Thus, this will be the linkage year for the backcasting dataseries. The first step towards estimating 2006-2007 NACE Rev. 2 ICT data is to obtainthe 2008 linking coefficients. We present two possible alternatives frequently used bythe Statistical Offices when faced with the need of providing homogenous time seriesfollowing major changes in National Accounts classifications.8
Table 2: Correspondences between NACE Rev. 2 and NACE Rev 1.1(based on the 2007 OECD ICT sector definition)COMPREHENSIVECORRESPONDENCE2007 OECD ICT DEFINITIONNACE Rev. 2 ISIC Rev. 68DescriptionNACE Rev. 1.1ICT manufacturing industriesManufacture of electroniccomponents and boardsManufacture of computers andperipheral equipmentManufacture of communicationequipmentManufacture of consumerelectronicsManufacture of magnetic andoptical media4654654651465146524652582, 61,62, 631,951582, 61,62, 631,951582582Software publishing6161Telecommunications6262Computer programming,consultancy and related activities631631951951ICT trade industries2465, 3002P,311P, 312P,313P, 3162P,321P-323P,365P311P, 312P,313P, 321P,323PISIC Rev. 3.12429P, 30P,311P, 312P,313P, 3162P,321P-323P,3694P311P, 312P,313P, 321P,323PNACE Rev. 1.12465, 30, 32ISIC Rev. 3.12429, 30, 323213213002P30P30303162P, 322P,323P3162P, 322P,323P322322323P, 365P323P, 3694P3233232465242924652429P5143P, 5184,51865139P, 5151,5152,51845151518451515143P, 51865139P, 5152518651523002P, 322P,323P, 5274P,642P, 72 (ex.723P-726P)7221, 724P30P, 322P,323P, 526P,642P, 72 (ex.723P-729P)7221, 724P642, 72642, 7272217221Wholesale of computers, computerperipheral equipment andsoftwareWholesale of electronic andtelecommunications equipment andpartsICT services industriesAPPROXIMATECORRESPONDENCE642P3002P, 721, 30P, 721,7222, 723P,723P,724P, 726PData processing, hosting andrelated activities; web portalsRepair of computers andcommunication equipment642P7229,724P,729P5184, 51865151, 5152642642721, 7222,726721, 7229,729723P, 724P723P, 724P723, 724723, 724322P, 323P,5274P, 725P322P, 323P,526P, 725P725725Note: The P indicates that the NACE Rev. 1.1 (ISIC Rev. 3.1) codes are linked with more than one NACERev. 2 (ISIC Rev. 4) codeSource: Eurostat (1996, 2008), MOSPI (2010), OECD (2011), UNSD (2002, 2008) and own elaboration.The first method proposed, which we will refer to as proportional, estimates the08*linking coefficients, X i , j , as the ratio between NACE Rev. 2 data and NACE Rev. 1.1data for each individual ICT sub-sector, variable and country as stated in equation 1.08rev 2X i08*X i08, j rev1, j X i, j[1]Being: X the variable (GVA, employment, BERD, ); 08rev2: 2008 NACE Rev. 2 ICT data;08rev1: 2008 NACE Rev. 1.1 ICT data; i: individual ICT sector; j: individual country.This method consists of applying each 2008 linking coefficient to each individual ICTsector, variable and country and for every year of the period 2006-2007 (equations 29
08*and 3). It should be noted that the linking coefficient, X i , j , is the same for 2007 and2006.rev 207 rev 1X i07 X i08*,j, j X i, jrev 206 rev 1X i06 X i08*,j, j X i, j[2][3]These linking coefficients assume that the value of the ICT sector under NACE Rev.1.1 is always a proportion of the value of the ICT sector under NACE Rev.2 remainingconstant from one year to the next. However, there is no statistical or economicreason to assume such proportionality. According to what we will refer to as theadditive method, the difference in the ICT sector between NACE Rev 1.1 and Rev. 2 isdue to the fact that ICT NACE Rev. 2 includes/excludes some activities that areexcluded/included in ICT NACE Rev. 1.1, i.e. the difference between both NACE shouldnot depend only on the value of either sector but also on the rules that eachclassification uses to classify activities.The additive method modifies the procedure of estimation in the following way. Letus assume that variable X is composed of only two sectors, ICT and non ICT sectorsand that the following relations hold:08rev 108rev 208X ICT, j X ICT , j d j[4]08rev 108rev 208X NICT, j X NICT , j d jrev 1rev 2X 08 X 08jj[5][6]Being: X the variable (GVA, employment, BERD, ); 08rev2: 2008 NACE Rev. 2 data;08rev1: 2008 NACE Rev. 1.1 data; d08j: the difference between both NACE data in2008; ICT: ICT sector; NICT: Non ICT sector; j: individual country.The linking coefficient that reflects the additive property is d08j /X08j computed in2008. Thus, the hypothesis implies that NACE Rev. 1.1 systematically allocatesmore/less GDP, employment, etc., to ICT than Rev. 2 does, which is precisely why themeasurement of ICT varies between the two versions. In order to improve the linkingcoefficients it would be advisable to measure d08j for each individual ICT industry.Therefore, according to this second method, the 2006-2007 NACE Rev. 2 ICT wouldbe obtained as follows:X07rev 2i,jX06rev 2i,j rev 1X i07,j di08,j 08 * X 07j X j rev 1X i06,j di08,j 08 * X 06j X j Being i: individual ICT sector10[7][8]
3.ITALY AS AN EXAMPLEWe will present in some detail the results for one European country (Italy) and twovariables (GVA and employment). The choice of Italy is not casual. It is the onlycountry with data available for all ICT sub-sectors (manufacturing and services) inboth classifications, NACE Rev. 1.1 and NACE Rev. 2, for GVA and employment. Irelandalso has data available for all ICT services sub-sectors for GVA and employment butnot for all ICT manufacturing sub-sectors. None of the other 25 European countrieshave the necessary disaggregated NACE Rev. 1.1 for GVA and employment toestimate all the ICT sub-sectors in Table 2. Therefore, another classification isneeded.The first step is to check if there are sizeable differences between the proportional(equations [1] to [3]) and additive (equations [4] to [8]) methods. Table 3 offers theresults of the estimation for year 2007 using the Italian data. As can be seen, thedifferences between the two metho
NACE Rev. 1.1 (ISIC Rev. 3) codes are often linked with more than one NACE Rev. 2 (ISIC Rev. 4) code. For example, 323 NACE Rev. 1.1 is linked with 261, 263 and 264 NACE Rev. 2 codes; 261 NACE Rev. 2 is linked with only one part of 311, 312, 313, 321 and 323 NACE Rev. 1.1 codes. Thus, it is not possible to obtain full codes of NACE
Afhankelijk van de onderwijsambities en de ICT inzet van de school kan dit zijn; een ICT kartrekker (Professional) een ICT-coördinator (Pionier) een ICT coach (Specialist) De rol van de ICT'er op school is vooral inspireren en adviseren bij een goede inzet van ICT en krijgt hierbij ondersteuning van de Adviseur ICT Onderwijs en .
Het aandeel van de ICT-sector is dus gegroeid. — In 2013 realiseerden Nederlandse ICT-bedrijven een lagere omzet dan in 2012. De krimp bedroeg 1,4 procent. Zowel de ICT-industrie, de ICT-groothandel als de ICT-dienstverlening zagen hun omzet dalen in 2013. — In 2012 zorgden ICT-bedrijven voor 5 procent van de toegevoegde waarde
ictvervult de rol van aanjager, uitmondend in de groei van de ict-sector en ict-gevoelige bedrijvigheid. De ict-sector blijkt zich momenteel te con-centreren in de Noordvleugel van de Randstad (de regio Amsterdam-Utrecht), op de a2-as en in de regio Eindhoven. Dit zijn gebieden waar de ict-sector zich ook als eerste ontwikkelde.
technologieën van de ICT-sector, waardoor de efficiëntie toeneemt. Deze rol van de ICT-sector is ook erkend in het Nederlandse Topsectorenbeleid, waarin de ICT-sector niet zelf als topsector wordt genoemd, maar wordt aangewezen als Innovatie As die de andere sectoren moet versterken (Nederland ICT, 2012). .
ICT SECTOR SKILLS NEEDS ANALYSIS IN VOJVODINA 06 PREFACE The Information and communication technology (ICT) sector has the capacity to drive innovation in business and the public sector. In its economic strategy, Serbia has prioritised ICT and the overall digitalisation of the economy and public services.
7.3 Children’s use of ICT 64 7.4 Use of ICT to support children’s learning 65 Supporting children’s learning 65 Documenting children’s learning 65 7.5 Use of ICT to communicate with parents, caregivers, and whānau 66 7.6 Staff use of ICT for their own learning 66 7.7 Staff readiness and confidence to use ICT 67
berdasarkan peringkat kesediaan, penggunaan, penerapan dan transformasi. d. Mengenal pasti fokus latihan ICT untuk meningkatkan kompetensi ICT pemimpin sekolah. 1.4 Soalan Kajian 1. Apakah tahap kompetensi ICT dalam kalangan pemimpin sekolah berdasarkan domain Dasar dan Kepimpinan ICT, Pembudayaan ICT organisasi, Pengetahuan dan Kemahiran
worden aangepakt door de huidige ICT-omkadering. Vanuit het onderwijsveld komt de vraag om het statuut van de ICT-coördinator te versterken en de taakomschrijving van de ICT-coördinatoren te actualiseren. Het is de ambitie van de Vlaamse overheid om de taak van de ICT-coördinator breder in te bedden in een teamgerichte ICT-werking van de .
