Appendix F – Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Why is the question I suggested not in the result table?

Your question may have been rephrased using different terminology because other similar questions were submitted.

Q2: Can I get more details on specific testing results for certain topics?

Yes, upon request, CEAG staff will be glad to discuss the testing results with you.

Q3: I submitted my data requirements for new questions for the 2016 Census of Agriculture questionnaire and I know that colleagues of mine made submissions for the same questions. Does the number of requests for a topic increase its chances of being included on the questionnaire?

Broad support is important and is taken into account when making the final decision on whether or not a topic will be covered on the questionnaire. However, a number of other factors determine what content will ultimately be included on the 2016 CEAG questionnaire. The selection process is described in detail in Section 4.2. Due to the objective to significantly reduce response burden, difficult decisions had to be made balancing valid submissions against competing space on a reduced size questionnaire (16 letter-sized pages).

Questions about specific topics could be discussed with CEAG staff.

Q4: Are data on my topic of interest available through sources other than the Census of Agriculture?

The Agriculture Division has a regular survey program that may contain data on your topic. New questions can sometimes be added to existing surveys on a cost-recovery basis. Administrative data can also sometimes meet data needs.

Q5: Many commodities have separate steps and questions while others are grouped into an “Other – Specify” category where producers have to write in the name of the commodity they are producing. What determines which commodities get a separate question and which are included in the “Other – Specify” category?

The frequency for which individual crops and livestock were reported in the previous census is studied at the Canada level. The results of this analysis determine which commodities receive a separate category on the questionnaire and which will continue to be included in the “Other - Specify” category.

Q6: Along with other users, I asked the Census of Agriculture to collect production data—that is, the quantities of agricultural products produced in the previous year such as the number of finished cattle or weaner pigs, tonnes of corn or kilolitres of maple syrup sold. How were these evaluated?

The CEAG asks for inventory data only, for example the number of animals and the area of each crop on Census Day. This provides a “snapshot” of the industry to establish comparisons over time.

For example, poultry production questions are asked so that poultry farms are not missed in the event there were no birds in the barns on Census Day (empty barns between production cycles).

Adding questions on production would increase response burden for most farmers. Statistics Canada uses sample surveys and administrative data sources to publish ongoing and timelier production data than would be possible from the CEAG. For more information on these surveys, please refer to Statistics Canada Web site.

Q7: I, along with other users, suggested wording changes or additional instructions to the questionnaire. How were these evaluated?

All suggestions were reviewed and researched. Depending on the results, some were included in qualitative testing with respondents. The review process is explained in Section 4.2.

Q8: Users, including me, had asked for more detail in existing questions, for example, further breakdown of crop varieties (such as GMO crops versus conventional) or livestock (breaking down goats into dairy, meat and fibre for example). How were these evaluated?

All suggestions were reviewed and most were tested. However, more detailed questions do not always produce better data for several reasons.

1. Further breakdowns may be a challenge for producers to answer and may affect the quality of the resulting data. For example, the 2001 Census asked that lambs be broken down between market and replacement lambs. Issues with the 2001 CEAG demonstrated that the timing of the census, in May, meant that the CEAG was not an appropriate collection method as most sheep farmers had not yet decided how many female lambs to use for herd replacement at census time in May.
2. Testing some topics with farmers indicated that although they can supply further detail, they are not willing to do so because of the time and difficulty it would take to work out the answers. Often, providing extensive detail requires referring to financial or production records, increasing the time it takes to complete the questionnaire at an already busy time of year. This can affect both the quality of responses and the overall response rate for the CEAG.
3. Further breakdown is not necessarily better for commodities that are relatively rare. If there are not many producers reporting rare or uncommon commodities, the more the commodities are divided into exclusive categories and the fewer observations there will be in each category. Fewer observations increase the likelihood that suppressing a category will be required for confidentiality reasons. A further breakdown for goats is a good example; one question already requires considerable data suppression and additional detail would mean more suppression—and less useable data.

Q9: When will the 2016 Census of Agriculture questionnaire be available to the public?

Until the final questionnaire has been approved by Cabinet and published in the Canada Gazette (estimated for the spring of 2015), it remains a secret document and is not available to the public.

Tables 4 and 5 summarize the submissions for content change for the 2016 CEAG. For each submission, you will find the 2011 questionnaire step number to which it relates, the testing path it followed^Note 1 and comments related to the criteria for not testing, testing results or alternative data sources.

Notes