COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on European statistics on population and housing, amending Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 763/2008 and (EU) No 1260/2013
Date: 2023-01-20
Institutions: European Commission, Eurostat
Subjects: EU statistics, census, data collection, exchange of information, family, household, population census, population statistics, statistical method

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 20.1.2023  SWD(2023) 12 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a  REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on European statistics on population and housing, amending Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 763/2008 and (EU) No 1260/2013 {COM(2023) 31 final} - {SEC(2023) 38 final} - {SWD(2023) 11 final} - {SWD(2023) 13 final} - {SWD(2023) 14 final} - {SWD(2023) 15 final}  
 
 
Introduction and background 

Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union, ensures the production of high-quality, 
comparable  European  statistics  according  to  the  statistical  principles  set  out  in  Regulation 
(EC) No 223/2009  on European statistics.  The  main uses of European statistics are to  serve 
EU policy design, implementation and monitoring, and their main users are EU  institutions. 
The European Statistical System is the partnership network between Eurostat and the national 
statistical institutes (NSIs). Eurostat’s role is to lead the way in the harmonisation of statistics, 
in  close  cooperation  with  national  statistical  authorities,  which  collect  data  and  compile 
statistics for national and EU purposes. 

Under  Article  9  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union,  every  national  of  a  Member  State,  in 
addition  to  the  national  citizenship,  is  also  a  citizen  of  the  European  Union.  To  design  and 
implement policies and activities benefiting the EU population and citizens in the areas of EU 
competences,  as  established  by  Articles  2  and  3  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European  Union,  EU  institutions  need  complete,  timely,  reliable,  detailed,  harmonised  and 
comparable  European  statistics  on  population.  These  statistics  are  also  the  backbone  of  all 
social statistics and indispensable for any more detailed annual population estimates, sample 
surveys, regional analysis and for producing population projections. 

In  the  context  of  this  initiative1,  European  statistics  on  population  (ESOP)  comprise:  (i) 
official  European  statistics  on  population,  demographic  events  and  migration2;  (ii)  statistics 
from  population  and  housing  censuses;  and  (iii)  the  various  indicators  based  on  these 
statistics. These statistics are currently governed by three legal bases developed independently 
of each other:  

-  Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 on Community statistics on migration and international 

protection;  

-  Regulation (EC) No 763/2008 on population and housing censuses; and  
-  Regulation (EU) No 1260/2013 on European demographic statistics. 

This  impact  assessment  establishes  and  examines  seven  different  policy  options  towards  a 
Commission  proposal  for  a  new  single  modernised  legal  framework  to  meet  evolving  user 
needs for population statistics. Since this also entails potential opportunities for administrative 
simplification and process integration compared to the status quo under the three non-aligned 
legal bases, this initiative is included in the 2022 Commission work programme as a REFIT3 
initiative.  The  impact  assessment  was  carried  out  back-to-back  with  an  evaluation  of  the 
current legal framework, as mentioned above. A single stakeholder consultation was carried 
out for the impact assessment and evaluation. 

1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12958-Data-collection-European-

statistics-on-population-ESOP-_en. 

2 Except for statistics on asylum and managed migration. 

3 The Commission’s Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme; COM(2012) 746. 

1 

 
                                                           
Problem definition 

The  evaluation  concluded  that  the  three  Regulations  led  to  significant  improvements  in 
European  population  statistics.  However,  there  are  several  gaps  and  weaknesses  in  the 
statistics produced under the current framework. 

The  first  problem  with  the  existing  legal  framework  is  that  the  resulting  statistics  are  not 
sufficiently  complete,  coherent  and  comparable,  which  may  lead  to  sub-optimal  decision 
making.  This  relates  to  key  statistical  definitions  (in  particular,  the  population  base  for  the 
statistics) which are equivocal, causing poor coherence and comparability. 

Secondly, availability of population data in terms of frequency and deadlines  is insufficient, 
as  the  transmission  of  data  on  various  important  topics  and  breakdowns  has  remained 
voluntary.  This  is  inefficient  at  EU  level  in  the  long  term,  as  it  fails  to  generate  EU  added 
value in terms of completeness, comparability and timeliness, despite the costs a majority of 
Member States incur in order to produce these statistics. 

Thirdly,  population  statistics  fail  to  capture  characteristics  and  details  of  politically  and 
societally relevant topics or groups. The current legal framework reflects the policy priorities 
current  when  the  regulations  were  adopted,  but  lacks  sufficient  flexibility  to  enable  the 
statistics  to  adapt  to  meet  new  priorities  such  as  the  EU  Green  Deal,  increasingly  dynamic 
population  movements  including  EU  and  regional  mobility,  and  equality  and  non-
discrimination policies. 

Finally,  population  statistics  are  also  going  through  a  period  of  major  change,  with  many 
Member  States  moving  to  increased  use  of  administrative  data  and  other  new  sources.  This 
potentially allows for statistics to be produced more frequently and in a more timely manner, 
and  at  a  lower  cost.  However,  it  is  not  possible  under  the  current  legal  framework  to  take 
advantage of such developments. 

The  evaluation  has  found  that  without  legislative  action,  in  the  future  these  problems  will 
persist or may worsen. 

Objectives 

The general goal of this EU action is to better respond to users’ needs, and to modernise and 
enhance  the  relevance,  harmonisation  and  coherence  of  European  population  statistics.  This 
goal  can  be  broken  down  into  four  specific  objectives  aligned  with  the  problems  outlined 
above, namely to: 

  ensure complete, coherent and comparable European population statistics; 
  ensure timely and frequent statistics to meet users’ needs; 
  provide  statistics  that  are  sufficiently  comprehensive  in  terms  of  relevant  topics  and 

sufficiently detailed in terms of characteristics and breakdowns; 

  promote  legal  and  data  collection  frameworks  that  are  sufficiently  flexible  to  adapt 

datasets to evolving policy needs and opportunities emerging from new sources. 

Policy options and their impacts 

Policy  options  have  been  constructed  by  grouping  granular  policy  measures  addressing  the 
specific objectives according to four characteristics of a possible intervention:  

2 

 
Table  1  –  Comparative  ambition  of  the  seven  policy  options  regarding  the  four  main  characteristics  of  the  possible 
intervention (scale: no ambition ‘0’, otherwise ‘+’, ‘++’ or ‘+++’). 

Policy option 

Harmonisation 
of statistics 

Integration 
of processes 

Statistical 
outputs 

Framework 
flexibility 

A (baseline) – Limited harmonisation, current 
statistical processes and outputs 

B.1 – Limited harmonisation, improved 
statistical processes, limited upgrade of 
statistical outputs and flexibility 

B.2 – Limited harmonisation, improved 
statistical processes, more expansive upgrade 
of statistical outputs and flexibility 

C.1 – Improved harmonisation and statistical 
processes, limited upgrade of statistical 
outputs and flexibility 

C.2 – Improved harmonisation and statistical 
processes, more expansive upgrade of 
statistical outputs and flexibility 

D.1 – Full harmonisation, improved statistical 
processes, major upgrade of statistical outputs 
and effective flexibility 

D.2 – Full harmonisation, redeveloped and 
integrated statistical processes, major upgrade 
of statistical outputs and effective flexibility 

0 

0 

0 

++ 

++ 

+++ 

0 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

0 

+ 

0 

+ 

++ 

++ 

+ 

+ 

++ 

++ 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

integration of statistical processes;  

  harmonisation of statistics where the main focus is on defining the population base; 
 
  statistical outputs;  
 

framework flexibility.  

Table 1 shows the resulting options that increase in ambition regarding the four characteristics 
mentioned.  

Option  A is  the baseline scenario,  with  separate  statistical  processes and  legislation, limited 
harmonisation of the population definition, and no new statistical outputs.  

The  main  features  of  options  B.1  and  B.2  are  an  upgrade,  with  increasing  ambition,  of  the 
statistical  outputs  and  the  framework’s  flexibility,  but  leaving  limited  harmonisation  of  the 
population base.  

Options  C.1  and  C.2  are  the  same  as  B.1  and  B.2,  but  with  a  more  ambitious  attempt  to 
harmonise the population base. Options B.2 and C.2 provide for a more expansive upgrade of 
the statistical output and framework flexibility compared to options B.1 and C.1.  

Finally,  options  D.1  and  D.2  would  involve  full  harmonisation  and  a  major  upgrade  of 
outputs,  as well as sufficient  flexibility for  future development  of the statistics to  meet  new 
needs.  Option  D.2  also  includes  the  introduction  of  a  statistical  population  register  in  all 
Member States. 

3 

 
 
Table 2 – Overview of key assessment outcomes for the preferred option D.2 and the alternative option C.2 

Overall assessments 

Option: 

D.2 

Proportionality 

Effectiveness 

Coherence with EU objectives 

Efficiency 

Stakeholder views (statistics producers v users) 

C.2 

Pass 

2.21 

3 

Uncertain 

3.71 

4 

Does not compare directly 

Deeply split 

More 
convergent 

Estimated incremental costs over baseline (in million 2021 EUR) 

NSIs 

one-off 

Eurostat 

one-off 

recurrent over 10 years 

recurrent over 10 years 

50.42 

128.92 

0. 83 

1.83 

24.41 

52.97 

0.48 

0.89 

Professional users 

REFIT benefits: Reduced administrative burden through … 
+++ 

ability to find all needed statistics on Eurostat website 

NSIs 

simplified statistics transmission processes 

integrated statistics production process 

improved use of admin. and/or other data sources 

regulatory changes to adapt to evolving policy needs 

Admin. data providers   streamlined data exchange with NSIs 

Eurostat 

regulatory changes to adapt to evolving policy needs 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

++ 

+++ 

++ 

+ 

0 

++ 

+++ 

++ 

++ 

The costs of all options have been quantified to the extent possible, using as criteria: (i) the 
level of harmonisation of the population base; (ii) the upgrade of statistical outputs; and (iii) 
the integration of statistical processes through national statistical population registers. Finally, 
benefits were itemised, but most of them could not be quantified due to their often indirect or 
dispersed nature and were thus assessed qualitatively. 

Comparison of options and preferred option 

With a lack of quantified benefits, a direct ranking of options is not possible. The efficiency 
assessment,  however,  showed  qualitatively  that  none  of  the  options  is  obviously  more  cost-
effective  than  any  other.  Rather,  the  options  offer  increasing  benefits  (directly  for  statistics 
users and indirectly for the whole society) at increasing costs (mostly for statistics producers, 
i.e. national statistical production systems). The deep division between producers and users of 
statistics  reflects  this  pattern  as  producers  focussed  on  costs  while  users  prioritised  the 
benefits. However, the assessment has clearly shown that ambitious action on data needs for 
EU  policy  priorities  has  its  price,  in  the  form  of  additional  resources  needed  for  statistics 
producers that  are  substantial  compared to  the current  baseline costs (up to  around 10% for 
option  D.2).  More  precisely,  only  the  most  ambitious  options,  D.1  and  D.2,  contain  strong 
measures to address the needs of key EU policy areas like urban/rural integration, the Green 
Deal, and fundamental rights and non-discrimination. Additionally, only option D.2 includes 

4 

 
 
statistical population registers as a strong measure to increase production efficiency and thus 
facilitate delivering the ambitious output goals. 

Therefore,  the  overall  preferred  option  is  D.2.  Being  most  ambitious  in  terms  of  statistical 
output  and  flexibility  of  the  framework,  it  achieves  the  best  result  thanks  to  a  similarly 
ambitious simplification and integration of the statistical production systems and sustainable 
long-term  efficiency  gains.  However,  uncertainties  remain  around  the  subsidiarity  and 
proportionality,  in  addition  to  the  significant  adaptation  costs  of  introducing  interoperable 
statistical  population  registers in  all Member States.  Therefore, an  alternative (conservative) 
approach preferring option C.2 would also be reasonable if the proportionality and efficiency 
concerns  of  option  D.2  are  given  more  weight  –  this  would  also  be  more  acceptable  to 
statistics producers as key stakeholders for the implementation. 

The  preferred  options  D.2  or  C.2  are  likely  to  generate  some  scope  for  possible  REFIT-
relevant  cost  savings  resulting  from  the  simplification,  streamlining  and  integration  of 
statistical  processes  (see  Table 2).  Notable  simplifications  are  expected  in  data  sharing 
between  source  data  owners  and  NSIs,  in  regulatory  adaptations  to  evolving  data  needs  for 
NSIs  and  Eurostat,  and  in  data  transmission  procedures  from  NSIs  to  Eurostat.  Users  will 
benefit from simplified and centralised access to statistics on the Eurostat website. Finally, the 
introduction  of  national  statistical  population  registers  in  all  Member  States  is  expected  to 
lead  to  significant  long-term  efficiency  gains.  The  impact  assessment  roughly  estimated  the 
potential recurrent EU-level cost savings on censuses at up to half a billion  euro per census 
round. 

As for whether there would be any new burden on people, the only potential source of such 
impacts  under  the  preferred  option  D.2  is  the  policy  measure introducing  new  collection 
modes  for  equality  data.  Since  at  least  some  of  these  variables  should  be  collected  by  self-
declaration,  some  form  of  incremental  direct  interaction  with  people  will  generally  be 
required.  Applying  the  ‘one-in,  one-out’  principle,  the  analysis  shows  only  a  negligible 
incremental response burden that would thus not generate any significant ‘net ins’. 

Regarding  new  costs  for  businesses,  the  only  potential  source  of  such  impacts  under  the 
preferred  options  D.2  and  C.2  are  the  policy  measure enabling  business-to-government  data 
sharing  for  European  population  statistics.  The  analysis  found  that  such  data  sharing  in 
general, including for official statistics, does not generate ‘net ins’ for businesses that would 
be relevant under the ‘one-in, one-out’ principle. 

Monitoring and evaluation 

The  performance  of  a  new  ESOP  framework  will  be  monitored  and  evaluated  using  the 
operational objectives set under each of the specific objectives mentioned. To this end, 24 key 
performance  indicators  including  current  baseline  benchmarks  and  provisional  targets  have 
been  defined,  mainly  by  reusing  or  adapting  indicators  used  in  the  evaluation.  A  first 
evaluation concluding the implementation phase is planned within 3 to 5 years after the entry 
into force of the new legal framework, but with at least 3 full years of statistics availability. 
After  transition  to  the  application  phase,  the  legislation's  functioning  and  impact  will  be 
evaluated regularly every 3 to 5 years. 

5