Financial Crisis Survey 2010, Second Round
Hungary, 2010
Get Microdata
Reference ID
HUN_2010_FCSr2_v01_M_WB
Producer(s)
World Bank
Collection(s)
Created on
Mar 24, 2011
Last modified
Sep 26, 2013
Page views
15922
Downloads
3784
Identification
Survey ID Number
HUN_2010_FCSr2_v01_M_WB
Title
Financial Crisis Survey 2010, Second Round
Subtitle
Second Round
Country/Economy
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Hungary | HUN |
Study type
Enterprise Survey [en/oth]
Series Information
The Financial Crisis Survey (FCS), an initiative of the Private Sector Development Vice-Presidency of the World Bank Group, provides a quick, short, and cost-efficient evaluation of the impact of the 2008 global financial crisis on private companies in European and Central Asian countries.
For this study, researchers contacted the same companies interviewed in 2008-2009 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Surveys (BEEPS), also referred to as 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys (ES). Manufacturing and services private sector establishments were surveyed for 2008-2009 BEEPS. The original data also served as a baseline for comparisons because it referred mostly to fiscal year 2007, thus measuring the pre-crisis scenario.
The Financial Crisis Survey was designed to follow up the same firms every six months during the financial crisis. The first round of FCS took place in June-July 2009, the second wave - in February-March 2010, and the third round was implemented in June-July 2010. Six countries - Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Turkey - participated in all three waves. Companies from Kazakhstan were surveyed only in the second round.
For this study, researchers contacted the same companies interviewed in 2008-2009 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Surveys (BEEPS), also referred to as 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys (ES). Manufacturing and services private sector establishments were surveyed for 2008-2009 BEEPS. The original data also served as a baseline for comparisons because it referred mostly to fiscal year 2007, thus measuring the pre-crisis scenario.
The Financial Crisis Survey was designed to follow up the same firms every six months during the financial crisis. The first round of FCS took place in June-July 2009, the second wave - in February-March 2010, and the third round was implemented in June-July 2010. Six countries - Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Turkey - participated in all three waves. Companies from Kazakhstan were surveyed only in the second round.
Abstract
This research was conducted in Hungary in February-March 2010 as part of the second round of The Financial Crisis Survey. Data from 152 establishments from private nonagricultural formal sector was analyzed to quantify the effect of the 2008 global financial crisis on companies in Hungary.
Researchers revisited establishments interviewed in Hungary Enterprise Survey 2009. Efforts were made to contact all respondents of the baseline survey to determine which of the companies were still operating and which were not. From the information collected during telephone interviews, indicators were computed to measure the effects of the financial crisis on key elements of the private economy: sales, employment, finances, and expectations of the future.
Researchers revisited establishments interviewed in Hungary Enterprise Survey 2009. Efforts were made to contact all respondents of the baseline survey to determine which of the companies were still operating and which were not. From the information collected during telephone interviews, indicators were computed to measure the effects of the financial crisis on key elements of the private economy: sales, employment, finances, and expectations of the future.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
The primary sampling unit of the study was the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must make its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
National
Geographic Unit
Regions covered were selected based on the number of establishments, contribution to employment, and value added. In most cases these regions were metropolitan areas and reflected the largest centers of economic activity in a country.
Universe
The manufacturing and services sectors were the primary business sectors of interest. This corresponded to firms classified with International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) codes 15-37, 45, 50-52, 55, 60-64, and 72 (ISIC Rev.3.1). Formal (registered) companies were targeted for interviews. Services firms included construction, retail, wholesale, hotels, restaurants, transport, storage, communications, and IT. Firms with 100% government ownership were excluded.
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name |
|---|
| World Bank |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name |
|---|
| World Bank |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
291 establishments that participated in Hungary Enterprise Survey 2009 were contacted for The Financial Crisis Survey. The implementing contractor received directions that the final achieved sample should include at least 150 establishments.
For Hungary Enterprise Survey 2009, the sample was selected using stratified random sampling. Three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and region.
Industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into 23 manufacturing industries, 2 services industries -retail and IT-, and one residual sector. Each sector had a target of 90 interviews.
Size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.
Regional stratification was defined in three regions. These regions are Central Hungary, West Hungary and East Hungary.
Given the stratified design, sample frames containing a complete and updated list of establishments for the selected regions were required. Great efforts were made to obtain the best source for these listings. However, the quality of the sample frames was not optimal and, therefore, some adjustments were needed to correct for the presence of ineligible units. These adjustments are reflected in the weights computation.
For most countries covered in 2008-2009 BEEPS, two sample frames were used. The first was supplied by the World Bank and consisted of enterprises interviewed in BEEPS 2005. The World Bank required that attempts should be made to re-interview establishments responding to the BEEPS 2005 survey where they were within the selected geographical regions and met eligibility criteria. That sample is referred to as the Panel. The second frame for Hungary was the Dun & Bradstreet database, which was considered the most reliable for the country. That frame was sent to the TNS statistical team in London to select the establishments for interviews.
The quality of the frame was assessed at the onset of the project. The frame proved to be useful though it showed positive rates of non-eligibility, repetition, non-existent units, etc. These problems are typical of establishment surveys, but given the impact these inaccuracies may have on the results, adjustments were needed when computing the appropriate weights for individual observations. The percentage of confirmed non-eligible units as a proportion of the total number of contacts to complete the survey was 4.6% (29 out of 630 establishments).
For Hungary Enterprise Survey 2009, the sample was selected using stratified random sampling. Three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and region.
Industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into 23 manufacturing industries, 2 services industries -retail and IT-, and one residual sector. Each sector had a target of 90 interviews.
Size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.
Regional stratification was defined in three regions. These regions are Central Hungary, West Hungary and East Hungary.
Given the stratified design, sample frames containing a complete and updated list of establishments for the selected regions were required. Great efforts were made to obtain the best source for these listings. However, the quality of the sample frames was not optimal and, therefore, some adjustments were needed to correct for the presence of ineligible units. These adjustments are reflected in the weights computation.
For most countries covered in 2008-2009 BEEPS, two sample frames were used. The first was supplied by the World Bank and consisted of enterprises interviewed in BEEPS 2005. The World Bank required that attempts should be made to re-interview establishments responding to the BEEPS 2005 survey where they were within the selected geographical regions and met eligibility criteria. That sample is referred to as the Panel. The second frame for Hungary was the Dun & Bradstreet database, which was considered the most reliable for the country. That frame was sent to the TNS statistical team in London to select the establishments for interviews.
The quality of the frame was assessed at the onset of the project. The frame proved to be useful though it showed positive rates of non-eligibility, repetition, non-existent units, etc. These problems are typical of establishment surveys, but given the impact these inaccuracies may have on the results, adjustments were needed when computing the appropriate weights for individual observations. The percentage of confirmed non-eligible units as a proportion of the total number of contacts to complete the survey was 4.6% (29 out of 630 establishments).
Weighting
Survey indicators were estimated through the use of sampling weights of the 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys adjusted by non-response in each wave of the Financial Crisis Survey. Therefore the results are still representative of the nonagricultural private economy within each country.
For 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys three sets of assumptions were considered while computing weights:
a- Strict assumption: eligible establishments are only those for which it was possible to directly determine eligibility.
b- Median assumption: eligible establishments are those for which it was possible to directly determine eligibility and those that rejected the screener questionnaire or an answering machine or fax was the only response. Median weights are used for computing indicators on the www.enterprisesurveys.org website.
c- Weak assumption: in addition to the establishments included in points a and b, all establishments for which it was not possible to finalize a contact are assumed eligible. This includes establishments with dead or out of service phone lines, establishments that never answered the phone, and establishments with incorrect addresses for which it was impossible to find a new address. Note that under the weak assumption only observed non-eligible units are excluded from universe projections.
For 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys three sets of assumptions were considered while computing weights:
a- Strict assumption: eligible establishments are only those for which it was possible to directly determine eligibility.
b- Median assumption: eligible establishments are those for which it was possible to directly determine eligibility and those that rejected the screener questionnaire or an answering machine or fax was the only response. Median weights are used for computing indicators on the www.enterprisesurveys.org website.
c- Weak assumption: in addition to the establishments included in points a and b, all establishments for which it was not possible to finalize a contact are assumed eligible. This includes establishments with dead or out of service phone lines, establishments that never answered the phone, and establishments with incorrect addresses for which it was impossible to find a new address. Note that under the weak assumption only observed non-eligible units are excluded from universe projections.
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2010-02 | 2010-03 |
Data Collection Mode
Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]
Data Collection Notes
Private contractors conducted the Financial Crisis Survey on behalf of the World Bank. Due to sensitive survey questions addressing business-government relations and corruption-related topics, private contractors are preferred over any government agency or an organization/institution associated with government, and are hired by the World Bank to collect the data.
Each establishment's senior managers were interviewed over the phone. The interview time was expected to last a maximum of twenty minutes. The survey was conducted in the local languages.
Each establishment's senior managers were interviewed over the phone. The interview time was expected to last a maximum of twenty minutes. The survey was conducted in the local languages.
Data Collectors
| Name |
|---|
| James and Tailor Consulting |
Questionnaires
Questionnaires
The following survey instrument is available:
- Financial Crisis Survey Questionnaire
- Financial Crisis Survey Questionnaire
Data Processing
Data Editing
Data entry and quality controls are implemented by the contractor and data is delivered to the World Bank in batches (typically 10%, 50% and 100%). These data deliveries are checked for logical consistency, out of range values, skip patterns, and duplicate entries. Problems are flagged by the World Bank and corrected by the implementing contractor through data checks and callbacks.
Access policy
Contacts
| enterprisesurveys@worldbank.org |
Confidentiality
Confidentiality of the survey respondents and the sensitive information they provide is necessary to ensure the greatest degree of survey participation, integrity and confidence in the quality of the data. Surveys are usually carried out in cooperation with business organizations and government agencies promoting job creation and economic growth, but confidentiality is never compromised.
Access conditions
Aggregate indicators based on Financial Crisis Survey data are available to the public at https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/FinancialCrisis/
Firm-level data is also available to the public free-of-charge. In order to access the firm-level data, users must agree to abide by a strict confidentiality agreement available through Enterprise Analysis Unit website by clicking on "External users register here" at https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/Portal
Firm-level data is also available to the public free-of-charge. In order to access the firm-level data, users must agree to abide by a strict confidentiality agreement available through Enterprise Analysis Unit website by clicking on "External users register here" at https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/Portal
Citation requirements
Where necessary please site the source as "Enterprise Analysis Unit - World Bank Group https://www.enterprisesurveys.org"
Disclaimer and copyrights
Disclaimer
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI_HUN_2010_FCSr2_v01_M_WB
Producers
| Name |
|---|
| Antonina Redko |
DDI Document version
Version 01