annual quality report 2016 data€¦ · two countries provided the code luzz instead of lu00 for...

ANNUAL QUALITY REPORT 2016 DATA

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION 3

2 QUALITY AT RECEPTION OF THE DATA 3

2.1 Reception status and timeliness 3

2.2 Data format of the provided files 4

2.3 Mode of transmission 4

2.4 Data revisions 5

3 MAIN ISSUES DURING INTEGRATION 5

3.1 Double records 5

3.2 Missing dimensions in the files 5

3.3 Incorrect table codes 5

3.4 Incorrect year codes 5

3.5 Empty vessels 6

3.6 Type of dangerous goods 6

3.7 Type of vessel 6

3.8 Type of transport 6

3.9 Obsolete NUTS codes used 6

3.10 Wrong NUTS codes used 6

3.11 Wrong codification for type of goods 6

3.12 Wrong codification for size of containers 7

3.13 Wrong codification for ports 7

3.14 Wrong codification for nationality of vessel 7

3.15 Wrong codification for loading status 7

4 SUMMARY OF THE ANNUAL DATA QUALITY REPORTS 7

4.1 Data comparability between 2015 and 2016 7

4.2 Inter-dataset checks 10

4.3 Check on usage of other/unknown codes 11

5 SUMMARY OF THE MIRROR CHECKS 12

1 INTRODUCTION

This report provides an overview of the data quality for the information collected under Regulation (EC) 1365/2006 on Inland Waterways transport statistics, amended by Regulation (EC) 1950/2016, for reference year 2016.

Eurostat is processing the data received and regularly makes quality checks during the validation process. The number of tables provided is checked, as well as the correctness of the format of the data and the number of revisions submitted by the countries. While integrating the data, codes used for the different dimensions are checked as well as the presence of double records.

After the reception of quarterly data, a time series report comparing the received quarter to the corresponding quarter of previous years is produced and sent to the reporting country.

Once all quarterly and annual data have been imported in the database for one country; time series checks (consistency of the data over time), inter-dataset checks and checks on the usage of unknown codes are produced. Once all countries are received, mirror checks are produced. Both reports are sent to the reporting countries.

2 QUALITY AT RECEPTION OF THE DATA

RECEPTION STATUS AND TIMELINESS

The following tables show the data reception status and an overview of the timeliness at 06/09/2017.

Quarterly tables

Annual tables

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Aug-16 Nov-16 Feb-17 May-17 Aug-16 Nov-16 Feb-17 May-17

Belgium

Bulgaria

Cezch Republic 0 0 0 0

Germany

France

Croatia 0 0 0 0

Italy*

Lithuania*

Luxembourg

Hungary

Netherlands

Austria

Poland 0 0 0 0

Romania

Slovakia 0 0 0

Finland*

United Kingdom**

* Countries providing data on a voluntary basis

** Reduced reporting obligation - E1 dataset only

0: No container transport for the period considered

No dataset D2 sent, f ile containing zeros created

Respect of deadline

Not applicable

D1 D2

Country

DATA FORMAT OF THE PROVIDED FILES

Almost all countries provided flat files (CSV or TXT). There is only one exception that provided an Excel file.

MODE OF TRANSMISSION

All countries sent the data via eDAMIS.

A1 B1 C1 E1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B2

Belgium

Bulgaria

Cezch Republic 0 0

Germany

France

Croatia

Italy*

Lithuania*

Luxembourg

Hungary

Netherlands

Austria

Poland 0

Romania

Slovakia

Finland*

United Kingdom**



0: No container transport / No transport of dangerous goods

No dataset D2 sent, f ile containing zeros created

Respect of deadline

Less than one month delay

More than one month delay

Data are not yet provided

Voluntary dataset not provided

Not applicable

Mandatory datasets

CountryAnnual

May-17

Voluntary datasets

DATA REVISIONS

Revised data were received for six countries.

The following table presents the number of revisions by reporting country and dataset received at 06/09/2017.

MAIN ISSUES DURING INTEGRATION

DOUBLE RECORDS

Five countries (out of 16) provided double records. Eurostat has systematically aggregated them, asking then for confirmation to the reporting country.

MISSING DIMENSIONS IN THE FILES

One country did not provide the three first dimensions for several records in dataset B1.

One country did not provide the dimension type of transport in dataset B2.

INCORRECT TABLE CODES

In the dataset D1, one country provided the table code D2 instead of D1.

In the dataset B1, one country provided a record with the table code B2 instead of B1.

INCORRECT YEAR CODES

In the dataset B1, one country provided a record with the year code 2017 instead of 2016.

A1 B1 C1 E1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B2

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Belgium 1 1

Bulgaria 1 1 1 1

Cezch Republic 1

Germany 0 0 0 0

France

Croatia

Italy*

Lithuania*

Luxembourg 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1

Hungary

Netherlands 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

Austria 1 1 1 1 1 1

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Finland*

United Kingdom**



No revision 1 revision 2-3 revisions

D1 D2

AnnualCountry

Mandatory datasets Voluntary datasets

EMPTY VESSELS

In dataset B2, one country provided empty field instead of 0 for the number of movements and VKM for empty vessels.

TYPE OF DANGEROUS GOODS

One country provided empty field instead of 99 for the type of dangerous goods.

TYPE OF VESSEL

One country provided empty field instead of 5 for the type of vessel.

One country provided 0 instead of 5 for the type of vessel.

TYPE OF TRANSPORT

One country provided the code 3 instead of 2 for the type of transport with BE21 as region of loading and LU00 as region of unloading.

One country provided the code 21 instead of 2 for the type of transport.

OBSOLETE NUTS CODES USED

One country used the code DE41 and DE42 instead of DE40 for the loading or unloading regions.

One country provided the code Dec.00 instead of DEC0 for the loading regions.

One country used the code DED3 instead of DED5 for the loading or unloading regions.

WRONG NUTS CODES USED

Two countries provided the code LUZZ instead of LU00 for the loading or unloading regions in Luxembourg.

One country provided the code GBZZ instead of UKZZ for the loading or unloading regions in the UK.

One country provided the code XSZZ instead of RSZZ for the loading or unloading regions in Serbia.

One country provided the code RS00 instead of RSZZ for the loading or unloading regions in Serbia.

One country provided the code XXZZ instead of ZZZZ for the loading or unloading in unknown regions.

Two countries provided the code MD71 instead of MDZZ for the loading or unloading regions in Moldavia.

One country provided codes based on the NUTS 2016 classification for the loading or unloading regions.

One country provided the code null for the loading or unloading regions.

WRONG CODIFICATION FOR TYPE OF GOODS

Three countries provided type of goods on three digits instead of two digits in dataset C1 (e.g. 161 instead of 16; 010 should be 10).

One country provided type of goods with codes containing a dot (e.g. 14.2 instead of 142; 8.3 instead of 083).

Four countries did not provide the starting zero (e.g. for 2-digits code 8 should be 08; for 3-digits code 19 should be 019).

WRONG CODIFICATION FOR SIZE OF CONTAINERS

Two countries provided size of containers on two digits instead of one digit in dataset C1 (e.g. 31 should be 1; 32 should be 2).

WRONG CODIFICATION FOR PORTS

One country provided the ISO code instead of the ISO code + 888 for the loading or unloading port (e.g. RS instead of RS888).

Two countries provided the ISO code + ZZZ instead of the ISO code + 888 for the loading or unloading port.

One country provided the unexisting codes RADMC and NOCOD (replaced by ZZ888).

One country provided the code GB181 and GBBEL.

WRONG CODIFICATION FOR NATIONALITY OF VESSEL

One country provided the code GB instead of UK for nationality of vessel.

Two countries provided the code GR instead of EL for nationality of vessel.

One country provided the code A1 instead of AT for nationality of vessel.

WRONG CODIFICATION FOR LOADING STATUS

One country provided the code 4 for the loading status.

SUMMARY OF THE ANNUAL DATA QUALITY REPORTS

The annual quality reports have been produced for all countries after the reception of annual datasets.

Three countries reported only the reduced dataset E1 (LT, FI and UK). For these countries, Eurostat has produced and sent a specific report comparing 2016 and 2015 reference years.

The following summary is based on the data received at 22/09/2017.

DATA COMPARABILITY BETWEEN 2015 AND 2016

This section presents the main remarks on fluctuations between 2015 and 2016 and the comments received by the countries (in italics).

Belgium: Total transport increased in tonnes (+2.5%) and slightly decreased in TKM (-0.9%). Transit transport fell for tonnes and TKM (-6.5% and -15.2% respectively). National transport increased for tonnes and TKM (+4.2% and +5.6% respectively). For international transport, tonnes increased (+2.8%) while there was a decrease for TKM (-2.9%).

Regarding total container transport, there have been a slightly increase for TKM (+1.4%), decrease for tonnes (-3.5%) and substantially decreases for TEU and TEU-km (-14.5% and -21.5% respectively).

Comments: No comment received on the time series report.

Bulgaria: Total transport increased slightly for tonnes (+1.5%) and decreased for TKM (-2.1%). National transport decreased substantially for tonnes and TKM (-27.9% and -18.4%). For international transport, decreases are observed for tonnes and TKM (-3.6% and -21.6% respectively).There was an increase in transit transport for Tonnes (+6.7%), while TKM slightly decreased with -0.8%.

International container transport registered a large decrease for tonnes, TKM, TEU and TEU-km (-64.3%, -78.2%, -64.5% and -78.3% respectively). No national container transport was reported in 2016. Transit container transport increased for tonnes and TKM (+7.2% and +7.3% respectively) and increased substantially for TEU and TEU-km (+25.9% for both). This resulted into a substantial decrease of total containers transport for tonnes and TKM (-24.7% and -25.1%, respectively) whereas it increased for TEU and TEU-km (+5.1% and +6.7%, respectively).


Czech Republic: For total transport of goods in 2016, there was a decrease for tonnes (-2.2%) and an increase for TKM (+9%). National transport slightly decreases for tonnes (-0.2%) and grew for TKM (+20.3%), while international transport fell (-10.4% for tonnes and -25.1% for TKM).

The number of loaded vessels decreased substantially in 2016 (-26.7%). In terms of VKM, a slightly increase was observed (+3.6%).


Germany: Total transport decreased very slightly for tonnes (-0.01%) and slightly for TKM (-1.8%). In particular, transit transport decreased for tonnes and TKM (-7% and -6.7% respectively). For national and international transport, slightly increases or decreases have been observed (+1.1% and +0.3% for tonnes, +0.4% and -1% for TKM, respectively).

Container transport increased in 2016 for tonnes, TKM, TEU and TEU-km (+4.4%, +4.2%, +2.5% and +2.5% respectively).


Finland: In 2016 compared to 2015, decreases in tonnes (-18.1%) and for TKM (-19.6%) are observed.


France: The total transport increased for tonnes (+3.3%) and decreased for TKM (-2.5%). The national and international transport decreased (-4.3% and -3.7% for tonnes, -11.6% and -3.4% for TKM, respectively). In contrast, transit transport increased substantially (+59.9% for tonnes and +51.7% for TKM).

In 2016, container transport fell compared to 2015 for TKM and TEU-km (-6% for both), but remained stable (very slight increase) for Tonnes and TEU (+0.3% and + 0.02%, respectively).


Croatia: In 2016, the tonnes transported and TKM performed have slightly decreased (-3.5% and -4.8%, respectively), though a large increase of national transport (+88.1% for tonnes and +90.6% for TKM). It can be noted international transport decreased for TKM (-18.2%) while tonnes increased (+12.9%). At the same time, transit transport decreased (-5.7% for tonnes and TKM).

Transport of dangerous goods rose in 2016 (+77.9% for tonnes and +89.9% for TKM), mainly due to the large growth in international and national transport (+25.1% and +90.9% for tonnes, +75.7% and +90.8% for TKM).

Container transport rose in 2016 compared to 2015 (+1.9% for both tonnes and TKM and +16.7% for both TEU and TEU-km).


Lithuania: In 2016 compared to 2015, a large decrease in tonnes (-23.7%) and a large increase for TKM (+25.4%) are observed.


Luxembourg: In 2016, there was a reduction in total tonnes transported and in TKM performed (-14.3% and -19%, respectively). International transport and transit transport fell (-10.3% and -15.1% for tonnes, -56.1% and -16.4% for TKM, respectively).

Transport of containers registered a large decrease for TKM and TEU-km (-58.1% and -63.4%, respectively), and smaller decrease for Tonnes and TEU (-8.6% and -24.6%, respectively). A considerable increase for international transport and a large decrease for transit transport were observed.


Hungary: Total transport slightly increased for tonnes (+0.8%), but increased somewhat for TKM (+8.3%). It can be noted that there were substantial decreases in national transport for tonnes and TKM (-9.2% and -58.5% respectively). Transit transport increased (+20.7% for tonnes and TKM), while international transport fell for tonnes and TKM (-7.9% and -4.2%, respectively).

Regarding total transport of dangerous goods, a very large increase is observed for TKM (-144%) while tonnages decreased (-7.7%). International and national transport grow considerably for TKM (+352% and +369.5%, respectively), while the transit transport slightly increase (+17.2%). A slightly decrease for international transport (-12%), and increases for national and transit transport (+34.5% and +17.2%, respectively) are observed for tonnes.

Regarding vessel traffic, movements and VKM of loaded vessels showed a slightly decrease (-6.5% and -1.1%, respectively), while movements and VKM of empty vessels showed growth (+26.8% for both).

Transport of containers registered a very large increase (+122.1% for tonnes, +116.9% for TKM, +150.6% for TEU and +144.3% for TEU-km) from 2015 to 2016.


The Netherlands: Total transport expressed in tonnes and in TKM increased slightly in 2016 (+1.6% for tonnes and +1.8% for TKM). National and transit transport increased for tonnes and for TKM (+2.4% and +11% for tonnes, +3.3% and +10.7% for TKM, respectively). International transport slightly decreased for both tonnes and TKM (-1.1% and -1.5%, respectively).

Regarding total transport of dangerous goods, there were only marginal changes for TKM from 2015 to 2016. For tonnes, it increased by 4.4% mainly because of a large increase of transit transport (+12.2% for tonnes and +14.4% for TKM).

Container transport showed a large decrease for TKM (-41.3%), slightly decreases for TEU and TEU-km (-5.2% and -3.1%, respectively), and a slightly increase for Tonnes (+1.7%).


Austria: In 2016, there was a growth in the tonnes transported (+5.5%) and TKM performed (+8.7%). National transport registered decreases for both tonnes and TKM (-10.5% and -22.9%, respectively). International and transit transport showed increases (+3.1% and +19.5% for tonnes, +4.3% and 19.5% for TKM, respectively).

Regarding container transport, the evolution between 2015 and 2016 showed a large increase for tonnes, TKM, TEU and TEU-km (+59.9%, +69.7%, +78.6% and +90.1%, respectively). These changes are due to the very large increases observed for transit transport (+208.1% for tonnes, +208.3% for TKM, +214.1% for TEU and +213.9% for TEU-km), and to the large increases observed for international transport (+51.3% for tonnes, +55.2% for TKM, +70.8% for TEU and +77.2% for TEU-km)

Comments: The fluctuations are due to low waters in the previous year (2015), in 2016 the situation improved.

Poland: Decrease for the tonnes transported (-22.3%) and increase the TKM performed (+22.8%) are observed in 2016. They are mainly caused by national transport (-22.7% for tonnes and +65.4% for TKM). Decreases are seen for international transport in tonnes and TKM (-21.2% and -20.7%, respectively). Transit transport registered a large increase for tonnes (+62%), and a slightly increase for TKM (+9.9%).

Regarding total transport of dangerous goods, there are very large increases for tonnes and TKM from 2015 to 2016, as they were multiplied by thirteen for both. Only activity for national transport has been declared.


Romania: In 2016, total transport showed a slightly growth compared to 2015 for tonnes (+1.5%) and remained stable for TKM (-0.1%). For national transport, there was an increase for tonnes (+11%) and TKM (+16.5%), while international transport decreased (-7.3% for tonnes and -10.4% for TKM). Transit transport fell for tonnes (-3.1%) and rose for TKM (+6.5%).

Transport of dangerous goods increased for tonnes (+9.8%) but fell for TKM (-6.4%).

Concerning vessel traffic, movements and VKM of loaded vessels have slightly increased (+2.8% and +3.1%, respectively). Movements and VKM of empty vessels fell (-5.2% and -10.4% respectively).

Regarding container transport, there is a very large increase for tonnes from 2015 to 2016, as it was multiplied by twenty-five. For TKM, TEU and TEU-km, very large increases were also observed (+724.7%, +382.9% and +133.6%, respectively).


Slovakia: In 2016, there were increases for tonnes and TKM (+18.1% for tonnes and +21.8% for TKM). National transport registered a significant grow for tonnes and TKM (+96.1% and +101.1%, respectively). International transport observed increases for tonnes (+10.5%) and for TKM (+31.4%). Transit transport increased for tonnes and TKM (+21% for both).

Transport of dangerous goods remained stable for TKM from 2015 to 2016 (+0.7%) while tonnes slightly decreased (-3.2%).

Transport of containers decreased substantially in 2016 (+50% for tonnes and TEU, +58% for TKM and TEU-km).

Comments: Data have been confirmed by Slovakia.

United Kingdom: In 2016, a slightly decrease is observed compared to 2015 in both tonnes and TKM (-2.5%).


INTER-DATASET CHECKS

The following checks have been carried out: A1 = B1; A1 (Goods in containers) = C1 (Loaded containers); A1 = A4 (Loading); A1 = A4 (Unloading); A1 = A5; B1 = D1 (Addition of quarterly figures), and; C1 = D1 (Addition of quarterly figures).

For 9 countries, there were only minor differences or no differences at between the datasets. For 4 countries, a number of more significant discrepancies between the datasets were identified.

The main issue concerns Croatia, which does not include transit transport in the quarterly dataset D1 and voluntary dataset A5. Thus, the aggregated quarterly data are not comparable with the annual data.

CHECK ON USAGE OF OTHER/UNKNOWN CODES

A number of checks have been performed in order to check the levels of data reported under the codes “Unknown”. These checks were applied for the following variables:

Loading/unloading regions/ports

Type of goods

Type of cargo

Nationality of vessel

They were applied on datasets A1, A4, A5, C1, D1, D2 and B1.

Except for Croatia, Hungary and Slovakia, the evaluation of the results shows that there is no substantial reporting of ‘Unknown’ codes and that these codes are used in reasonable limits by the countries.

Croatia provided substantially number of “Unknown” codes for the port of loading in dataset A4, and only “Unknown” codes for the type of cargo in dataset A5.

Hungary provided a very large number of “Unknown” codes for the type of cargo in dataset A5.

Slovakia provided a very large number of “Unknown” codes for the region of loading, region of unloading and type of goods in dataset A1.

SUMMARY OF THE MIRROR CHECKS The table below lists the most relevant differences (more than 1 million tonnes) observed in the mirror checks at country level.

The results presented below are based on the data received at 06/09/2017.

The relative difference between two values V1 and V2 is the absolute difference between V1 and V2 divided by the average of V1 and V2.

The following graph shows the trend of the relative differences (in %) of the total tonnage since 2007, at EU level.

*EU27 in 2007 as Croatia did not report dataset A1

The deviation at EU level (i.e. the sum of absolute differences compared to the total tonnage of Intra-EU) increased every year in the period 2007-2009. A strong decrease can be observed in 2010, indicating that mirror discrepancies are improving in terms of tonnage. Then, the relative differences observed at EU level slightly increased until 2012 and remained stable since 2013. A decrease can be observed in 2016 compared with 2015.

Hereafter, the table presents the complete results at loading/unloading country level.

Loading

country

Unloading

country

Tonnes

reported by

loading

country

Tonnes

reported by

unloading

country

Absolute

Difference

Absolute

Difference

in

percentage

NL BE 45 111 993 50 120 398 5 008 405 11. %

FR BE 4 249 899 6 301 894 2 051 995 39. %

BE NL 35 518 943 33 718 654 1 800 289 5. %

DE BE 14 985 759 16 388 543 1 402 784 9. %

FR NL 5 238 107 3 999 780 1 238 327 27. %

BE FR 4 635 864 3 538 435 1 097 429 27. %

NL FR 3 343 333 4 383 826 1 040 493 27. %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country

Tonnes reported by unloading country

Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

BE AT 54 561 53 650 911 1.68 %

BE CZ 1 112 3 372 2 260 100.80 %

BE DE 13 687 017 13 663 437 23 580 0.17 %

BE FR 4 635 864 3 538 435 1 097 429 26.85 %

BE HU 42 368 81 240 38 872 62.90 %

BE LU 119 574 140 649 21 075 16.20 %

BE NL 35 518 943 33 718 654 1 800 289 5.20 %

BE PL 1 185 686 499 53.34 %

BE RO 510 : 510 :

BE SK 18 720 2 121 16 599 159.29 %

Total 54 079 855 51 202 245 2 877 610 5.47 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

BG AT 35 096 39 735 4 639 12.40 %

BG DE 142 792 129 409 13 383 9.83 %

BG HR 2 202 12 2 190 197.83 %

BG HU 4 732 15 020 10 288 104.17 %

BG NL 4 226 2 380 1 846 55.89 %

BG RO 1 019 891 1 113 925 94 034 8.81 %

BG SK 49 760 53 134 3 374 6.56 %

Total 1 258 699 1 353 615 94 916 7.27 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

CZ BE 3 257 3 145 112 3.50 %

CZ BG : 267 267 :

CZ DE 70 054 200 948 130 894 96.60 %

CZ FR 18 101 : 18 101 :

CZ NL 1 504 5 039 3 535 108.05 %

Total 92 916 209 399 116 483 77.06 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

DE AT 320 825 265 640 55 185 18.82 %

DE BE 14 985 759 16 388 543 1 402 784 8.94 %

DE BG 26 943 18 547 8 396 36.91 %

DE CZ 71 258 32 547 38 711 74.58 %

DE FR 2 531 614 2 623 026 91 412 3.55 %

DE HR 13 800 9 952 3 848 32.40 %

DE HU 38 640 27 744 10 896 32.83 %

DE LU 332 155 459 156 127 001 32.10 %

DE NL 28 742 837 27 793 114 949 723 3.36 %

DE PL 52 854 55 632 2 778 5.12 %

DE RO 16 336 23 090 6 754 34.26 %

DE SK 9 562 3 989 5 573 82.25 %

Total 47 142 583 47 700 980 558 397 1.18 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

FR BE 4 249 899 6 301 894 2 051 995 38.89 %

FR DE 4 771 383 4 559 280 212 103 4.55 %

FR HU : 9 525 9 525 :

FR LU 824 41 955 41 131 192.30 %

FR NL 5 238 107 3 999 780 1 238 327 26.81 %

Total 14 260 213 14 912 435 652 222 4.47 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

HR AT 21 137 17 000 4 137 21.70 %

HR BG 26 554 23 155 3 399 13.68 %

HR DE 14 234 43 714 29 480 101.75 %

HR HU 15 720 14 504 1 216 8.05 %

HR NL 1 552 5 006 3 454 105.34 %

HR RO 102 377 78 404 23 973 26.52 %

Total 181 574 181 783 209 0.12 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

LU BE 90 416 72 436 17 980 22.08 %

LU DE 63 808 25 188 38 619 86.79 %

LU FR 5 117 2 706 2 411 61.64 %

LU NL 113 506 76 304 37 202 39.20 %

Total 272 847 176 634 96 212 42.81 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

HU AT 467 920 491 242 23 322 4.86 %

HU BE 57 759 55 087 2 672 4.74 %

HU BG 38 729 28 900 9 829 29.07 %

HU DE 654 727 767 518 112 791 15.86 %

HU FR 26 845 7 995 18 850 108.21 %

HU HR 19 982 8 298 11 684 82.63 %

HU NL 190 365 175 629 14 736 8.05 %

HU RO 1 455 233 1 475 085 19 852 1.35 %

HU SK 716 : 716 :

Total 2 912 276 3 009 754 97 478 3.29 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

NL AT 367 980 652 698 284 718 55.79 %

NL BE 45 111 993 50 120 398 5 008 405 10.52 %

NL BG 1 000 2 825 1 825 95.42 %

NL CZ 3 380 20 500 17 120 143.38 %

NL DE 81 778 338 81 110 216 668 122 0.82 %

NL FR 3 343 333 4 383 826 1 040 493 26.93 %

NL HR 11 932 10 690 1 242 10.98 %

NL HU 85 377 67 387 17 990 23.55 %

NL LU 108 557 120 191 11 634 10.17 %

NL PL 1 520 401 1 119 116.50 %

NL RO 15 704 : 15 704 :

NL SK 3 215 2 088 1 127 42.50 %

Total 130 832 329 136 491 219 5 658 890 4.23 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

AT BE 138 300 140 958 2 658 1.90 %

AT BG 82 216 79 865 2 351 2.90 %

AT DE 350 810 439 456 88 646 22.43 %

AT HR 40 135 56 660 16 525 34.14 %

AT HU 509 173 475 783 33 390 6.78 %

AT NL 210 176 255 572 45 396 19.49 %

AT RO 438 890 426 380 12 510 2.89 %

AT SK 29 752 38 735 8 983 26.23 %

Total 1 799 452 1 913 409 113 957 6.14 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

PL BE 2 348 3 560 1 212 41.03 %

PL DE 749 772 802 551 52 779 6.80 %

PL NL 240 3 832 3 592 176.42 %

Total 752 360 809 943 57 583 7.37 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

RO AT 188 952 186 186 2 766 1.47 %

RO BE 163 1 217 1 054 152.75 %

RO BG 529 721 572 693 42 972 7.80 %

RO DE 82 222 77 559 4 663 5.84 %

RO HR 32 351 21 660 10 691 39.59 %

RO HU 754 860 694 676 60 184 8.30 %

RO NL : 5 246 5 246 :

RO SK 8 114 9 670 1 556 17.50 %

Total 1 596 383 1 568 907 27 476 1.74 %

Loading country

Unloading country

Tonnes reported by

loading country


Absolute Difference

Absolute Difference

in percentage

SK AT 1 294 758 1 513 458 218 700 15.58 %

SK BE 4 494 7 198 2 704 46.25 %

SK BG 4 062 7 252 3 190 56.39 %

SK DE 180 597 209 502 28 905 14.82 %

SK HU 6 991 62 188 55 197 159.58 %

SK NL 54 562 28 600 25 962 62.44 %

SK RO 204 776 149 575 55 201 31.16 %

Total 1 750 240 1 977 773 227 533 12.21 %

annual quality report 2016 data€¦ · two countries provided the code luzz instead of lu00 for...

Documents